Log in
Register
Search
Search titles only
By:
Search titles only
By:
Forums
New posts
Forum list
Search forums
Leaderboards
Games
Our Blog
Blogs
New entries
New comments
Blog list
Search blogs
Credits
Transactions
Shop
Blessings: ✟0.00
Tickets
Open new ticket
Watched
Donate
Log in
Register
Search
Search titles only
By:
Search titles only
By:
More options
Toggle width
Share this page
Share this page
Share
Reddit
Pinterest
Tumblr
WhatsApp
Email
Share
Link
Menu
Install the app
Install
Forums
Discussion and Debate
Discussion and Debate
Physical & Life Sciences
Creation & Evolution
Hovind's lies exposed.
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="EnemyPartyII" data-source="post: 52521403" data-attributes="member: 162500"><p>While I too strongly subscride to the consensus view that birds (avians) are decended from dinosaurs (dinosauria), I think its rather important to clarify that just because one may, with an element of poetic license, describe birds as dinosaurs, to artificially conflate the two is wrong.</p><p> </p><p>Another way... yes, in a certain regard, all birds are dinosaurs... but not all dinosaurs are birds. And I certainly don't think that modern birds are what is being IMPLIED when creationists discuss dinosaurs. Of course, the way the imply then deny game works is that the creationists will make claims about native Americans hunting dinosaurs, then when confronted, claim that they mean turkeys and they never mentioned apatosaurus, but by that stage you've been drawn in by the whole clabby arguement.</p><p> </p><p>(Yes, thats precisely the word I meant to use. <a href="http://meaningofliff.free.fr/definition.php3?word=Clabby&lang=en" target="_blank">The Meaning of Liff</a> )</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="EnemyPartyII, post: 52521403, member: 162500"] While I too strongly subscride to the consensus view that birds (avians) are decended from dinosaurs (dinosauria), I think its rather important to clarify that just because one may, with an element of poetic license, describe birds as dinosaurs, to artificially conflate the two is wrong. Another way... yes, in a certain regard, all birds are dinosaurs... but not all dinosaurs are birds. And I certainly don't think that modern birds are what is being IMPLIED when creationists discuss dinosaurs. Of course, the way the imply then deny game works is that the creationists will make claims about native Americans hunting dinosaurs, then when confronted, claim that they mean turkeys and they never mentioned apatosaurus, but by that stage you've been drawn in by the whole clabby arguement. (Yes, thats precisely the word I meant to use. [URL="http://meaningofliff.free.fr/definition.php3?word=Clabby&lang=en"]The Meaning of Liff[/URL] ) [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Discussion and Debate
Discussion and Debate
Physical & Life Sciences
Creation & Evolution
Hovind's lies exposed.
Top
Bottom