Scientists find first bird beak.

[Brightmoon]

This the Wikipedia article on Hesperornis . it’s a screenshot, you’ll have to google if you want the whole article

 

[dad]

Me no can type . I’m female by the way and I’m aware of your ignorance of the subject because I’m not. I occasionally do teach science classes

Then I am aware of your ignorance if you teach kids the fables as science. Ditto.

 

[Brightmoon]

My Oldest is a sigma xi biochemist . He was one of the “ignorant “ kids I taught

 

[dad]

My Oldest is a sigma xi biochemist . He was one of the “ignorant “ kids I taught

One assumes he deals with chemicals in the here and now. The problem would come when someone claims reactions we now see represent something else.

 

[Brightmoon]

I said he was a biochemist not a paleontologist. Although because he does understand how science gets its answers, he’d accept paleontological information . All of the sciences bleed into and reconfirm each other anyway which is something you, YECs and other creationists don’t seem to understand .

 

[dad]

I said he was a biochemist not a paleontologist. Although because he does understand how science gets its answers, he’d accept paleontological information .

So that is the mark of a real knowledgeable person, that if he does NOT know, he blindly accepts whatever science says!!!!? Ha.

Maybe they should hand out degrees in NOT knowing, but blindly believing very deeply.

All of the sciences bleed into and reconfirm each other anyway which is something you, YECs and other creationists don’t seem to understand .

I understand that your religion has internal consistency. You kidding?

 

[Jimmy D]

So that is the mark of a real knowledgeable person, that if he does NOT know, he blindly accepts whatever science says!!!!? Ha.

Maybe they should hand out degrees in NOT knowing, but blindly believing very deeply.
I understand that your religion has internal consistency. You kidding?

Well, that’s not a very nice post. Why are you trying to denigrate Brightmoon’s son by adding “blindly” to what she said, mockingly implying that he’s foolish or something?

Seems that you don’t care who you criticise or misrepresent.

Seems a bit rich to me given you attempting to defend a book that specifically instructs not to adopt such an attitude.

 

[Bugeyedcreepy]

They cannot be fooled if grounded to the truth. They cannot help but be fooled if they are not. The god of this world has blinded their eyes. Think about it. If creation is real, what mechanism in this world blinds people regarding how Jesus really created all things including the heavens, and life? One word comes to mind...science. Science is the instrument to blind people. Yet it presents itself as a bearer of light!!!!

wow

Well, science is something that is verifiable, like Mathematics. You can add 2+2 and get 4, you can double check your answers and someone else can independently check your maths to get the same result, time and time again. The only way that others couldn't get your answer is because they (or you) either can't do the maths to start with, or have done the maths wrong somewhere in their working - either way, their results and workings can be confirmed or exposed as wrong by you or others in turn. This is how science is done. There are no authorities that have to be believed simply because of their status in the community, because authorities can be wrong too.

Religion though, revolves around an unquestionable authority allegedly presenting "Truth" - if as you say there IS a demon god of this world, then That's where the subversion of an alleged "creation" would happen - if God truly did create this universe, then surely you'd agree that he'd be honest about his creation and we would see his handiwork in it independently of any supposed "Religious Authority" that can't be questioned (perhaps 2+2=5 and the religious followers will have to believe that regardless of the "real world" evidence to the contrary). This is what we see and we can all see it independently of each other if we take the time to study science in exactly the same way we had to study mathematics. Once you get the core basics down pat, you can confirm your results independently of others. Scientists from all over the world speaking different languages who practice many different religions are all able to come to the same consensus on matters of Science (they can all find their own answer to 2+2 and they all get 4). Religions by comparison have all gone in very different directions (some religions believe 2+2=22, others believe 2+2 is another way of saying 2.2, yet another is profoundly convinced that it is 2.22222 recurring, etc. Of course none of the religious adherents are allowed to do the maths themselves without their religious leader there to help them "interpret" their answers and some aren't even allowed to do the maths at all!). That you don't seem capable or willing to see this makes me say...

wow

Ok so now you are trying to make it personal...about you.

Well, answer me this, if science is the tool of the devil to delude men and keep them from believing in creation and God...

No, more likely "Religion" would be the tool of the devil to delude men for the reasons aforementioned...

...how would your position of not believing in God be able to protect you from being blinded?

Well of course, I wouldn't already be blinded by a belief in other wrong Gods for a start, so I am literally in the best position to find the true God (if one exists) by not holding a pre-conceived position on any before I start. I'm not sure how evidence and repeatable, testable results I can achieve independently are supposedly the "delusion" and the irrational position of just blindly believing what a religious figure decrees from the pulpit of their particular religion (one of many tens of thousands available mind you), over my own possibly suppressed doubts and observations supposed to be the better of the two?

There is only one Light and one Way to see the light. There is only one way to NOT be blinded by the inspired doubts and deceptions of science!

...you mean "...There is only one way to NOT be blinded by the inspired doubts and deceptions of Religion, and that's Science!" - because again, there's only one "Science" and you either accept it or deny it. Those who accept it get the benefits of longer life, better quality of life, better technology, better food, better economy, etc.

There is lots of evidences for lots of gods. What we should ask ourselves is if there is a real and good actual Almighty creator God also. The issue is not whether there also are some demons with some power or reality.

None of those little evil demon gods would likely oppose science, which is the chief demon's tool to deceive the world. (if they did, they would be the odd demon out so to speak in the kingdom of darkness)

Religion is the single most versatile tool for deceiving the masses. Look at all of the tens of thousands of religions around the world, many of them supposedly Christian like you, who you would say aren't following your God the right way and may even be condemning themselves to an unfortunate Judgement.

If of the two (Science and Religion) you believe one could be holding us back and the other would be furthering us all collectively, then it would be Religion in the former category and Science in the latter.

 

[dad]

Well, that’s not a very nice post. Why are you trying to denigrate Brightmoon’s son by adding “blindly” to what she said, mockingly implying that he’s foolish or something?

She held someone up as an example and explained how he actually used belief blindly for the unknown.

Seems that you don’t care who you criticise or misrepresent.

Or you who you falsely accuse.

Seems a bit rich to me given you attempting to defend a book that specifically instructs not to adopt such an attitude.

My attitude to false shepherds who mislead children, and false prophets of the so called science religion is not one of reverence but of a relationship with a dangerous enemy.

 

[dad]

Well, science is something that is verifiable, like Mathematics. You can add 2+2 and get 4, you can double check your answers and someone else can independently check your maths to get the same result, time and time again. The only way that others couldn't get your answer is because they (or you) either can't do the maths to start with, or have done the maths wrong somewhere in their working - either way, their results and workings can be confirmed or exposed as wrong by you or others in turn. This is how science is done. There are no authorities that have to be believed simply because of their status in the community, because authorities can be wrong too.

Nothing is verifiable about what laws/nature existed on earth.

Religion though, revolves around an unquestionable authority allegedly presenting "Truth" - if as you say there IS a demon god of this world, then That's where the subversion of an alleged "creation" would happen - if God truly did create this universe, then surely you'd agree that he'd be honest about his creation and we would see his handiwork in it independently of any supposed "Religious Authority" that can't be questioned (perhaps 2+2=5 and the religious followers will have to believe that regardless of the "real world" evidence to the contrary).

He was honest in the word He gave man. Science skews what we see, and runs it through filters that are belief based.

This is what we see and we can all see it independently of each other if we take the time to study science in exactly the same way we had to study mathematics.

Math has no meaning in itself. The little symbols that we do the math on that represent time, speed of light...etc etc are what are at issue.

Once you get the core basics down pat, you can confirm your results independently of others. Scientists from all over the world speaking different languages who practice many different religions are all able to come to the same consensus on matters of Science (they can all find their own answer to 2+2 and they all get 4).

No. They all apply the same methodology and make the same mistakes.

Religions by comparison have all gone in very different directions (some religions believe 2+2=22, others believe 2+2 is another way of saying 2.2, yet another is profoundly convinced that it is 2.22222 recurring, etc. Of course none of the religious adherents are allowed to do the maths themselves without their religious leader there to help them "interpret" their answers and some aren't even allowed to do the maths at all!). That you don't seem capable or willing to see this makes me say...

Regardless of what other belief systems do, that does not excuse science. There are no maths they can do that are not belief based regarding origin issues.

No, more likely "Religion" would be the tool of the devil to delude men for the reasons aforementioned...

Since Babel, yes, religions have been tools of the dark side. But look at what really keeps people from believing in a created world...is it because of Islam...Budhism..Zen..etc? Not so much. The chief tool of the devil in casting doubt on God's creation is science.

Well of course, I wouldn't already be blinded by a belief in other wrong Gods for a start, so I am literally in the best position to find the true God (if one exists) by not holding a pre-conceived position on any before I start. I'm not sure how evidence and repeatable, testable results I can achieve independently are supposedly the "delusion" and the irrational position of just blindly believing what a religious figure decrees from the pulpit of their particular religion (one of many tens of thousands available mind you), over my own possibly suppressed doubts and observations supposed to be the better of the two?

You have no way to test what nature was. Nor any way to test what time is like in deep space. None. You have religion. 100%

...you mean "...There is only one way to NOT be blinded by the inspired doubts and deceptions of Religion, and that's Science!" - because again, there's only one "Science" and you either accept it or deny it. Those who accept it get the benefits of longer life, better quality of life, better technology, better food, better economy, etc.

Nothing to do with origin sciences.

Along with the better life you say science gives comes a lot of murderous things also.

Religion is the single most versatile tool for deceiving the masses. Look at all of the tens of thousands of religions around the world, many of them supposedly Christian like you, who you would say aren't following your God the right way and may even be condemning themselves to an unfortunate Judgement.

If they believe in Jesus, far as I am concerned they have eternal life. My arguments abut creation and science are not related to salvation. Yes, believers are often wrong about a lot. That is not what saves them.

If of the two (Science and Religion) you believe one could be holding us back and the other would be furthering us all collectively, then it would be Religion in the former category and Science in the latter.

Science is just another religion. It is not one or the other. It is what we chose to believe.

 

[Brightmoon]

That screed of yours was the silliest bunch of tripe I’ve read in a long time . Science is all about testing assumptions . This is why Darwin changed his mind ( after 23 of studying living and extinct natural phenomena)this is why Galileo changed his mind ( after directly observing what he subsequently wrote about

 

[Bugeyedcreepy]

Nothing is verifiable about what laws/nature existed on earth.

It's my opinion that it's just your opinion, and that your opinion is wrong.

Now, how do we determine who's opinion is closer to fact? Do we interpret our particular favourite unquestionable authority's holy text for an answer and cherry pick the one we like? Or do we look at all of the independently verifiable evidence in an objective manner to see which position is better supported by it?

He was honest in the word He gave man.

He didn't give it to me... I'm not even sure if he was a real person.

Science skews what we see, and runs it through filters that are belief based.

You're confused, that's Religion doing that, not Science.

Math has no meaning in itself. The little symbols that we do the math on that represent time, speed of light...etc etc are what are at issue.

only for you, everyone else seems to be doing just fine with them. You're not contributing anything to our collective body of knowledge anyway, so it's not really a problem - that is until you start robbing children of the curiosity of the sciences, you know, the very thing required to continue future generations of scientific contributions and progress...

No. They all apply the same methodology and make the same mistakes.

yet your opinion without foundation (incidentally different to every other religious opinion without foundation too) is the correct one over the consensus of millions who study and research in their respective fields of which you've studied very little to none by comparison. Even though we've made (and continue to make) tangible progress through these scientific methodologies that you don't like.

Regardless of what other belief systems do, that does not excuse science. There are no maths they can do that are not belief based regarding origin issues.

You miss the point (what a surprise!). Nobody has any way to know what you believe is right. You just believe it and demand everyone else believe you on no evidence and quite frankly, weird reasoning.

Since Babel, yes, religions have been tools of the dark side. But look at what really keeps people from believing in a created world...is it because of Islam...Budhism..Zen..etc? Not so much. The chief tool of the devil in casting doubt on God's creation is science.

Except Science is the one true constant that is and has been independently verified all the time irrespective of the worldview and nationality of the scientist. What isn't verifiable is the myriad of religions, of which your particular interpretation of your particular religion is but one.

You have no way to test what nature was. Nor any way to test what time is like in deep space. None. You have religion. 100%

We do it all the time so it can't be religion. This is just weapons grade ignorance from someone who is invested in staying ignorant.

Nothing to do with origin sciences.

Along with the better life you say science gives comes a lot of murderous things also.

Science isn't responsible for what extremists are capable of. Not sure what your gripe is about origin sciences in particular, what I speak of applies to all sciences.

If they believe in Jesus, far as I am concerned they have eternal life. My arguments abut creation and science are not related to salvation. Yes, believers are often wrong about a lot. That is not what saves them.

Plenty of Christians (in fact more christian than not) believe in Jesus and accept the prevailing science across the board (yes, including origins). Since you have no verification of the stories you espouse and since salvation only requires (even by your own admission) simply believing in Jesus, then your resistance to Science is completely unfounded and you should step aside and allow the future generations to study the sciences and make further scientific progress without all this non-existent conflict between these "non-overlapping magisteria"

Science is just another religion. It is not one or the other. It is what we chose to believe.

...a Religion you say? Who are the Priests or unquestionable authorities of Science? What rituals do Scientists practice to maintain their "faith" in science? Does Science have a funny hat worn by its unquestionable authorities like all the other Religions?

Great minds want to know!

 

[Bugeyedcreepy]

Science is just another religion. It is not one or the other. It is what we chose to believe.

Just on this last bit, I can't help wondering, do Scientists send probes into space by "believing" in their religion of science? What happens if they have a crisis of faith and stop believing, do those satellites fall out of the sky? What if Scientists that put up the GPS Satellites stopped believing in Science, will Relativity stop working for them and our GPS will start sending us to the wrong places? Will Nuclear Power Stations stop giving us clean energy if physicists that built them stop believing in Science? What about all the medicines and technologies developed worldwide, will they all stop working because medical researchers and chemists stop believing in their religion of Science?

Reality doesn't stop just because you don't believe in it. Science is literally the study of reality. That your particular interpretation of your particular religion doesn't correlate with Reality isn't reality's fault.

 

[PsychoSarah]

Honestly, given what is known about therapod dinosaurs currently, I don't know why creationists just don't lump them with modern birds as the same kind

 

[FrumiousBandersnatch]

The occasional development of tooth buds on birds is an atavism that's been known for years - see, for example, Mutant Chicken Grows Alligator-like Teeth.

 

[Brightmoon]

People are complaining about a chicken/human hybrid on another thread that I can’t post in . They don’t realise that animal/ human hybrids have been used for decades in medical research . Mice with human immune systems are used in AIDS research for example . I have no idea what these are used for but I’m guessing it has something to do with the flu.

 

[dad]

It's my opinion that it's just your opinion, and that your opinion is wrong.

If you had more than opion for that claim, we might look at it.

Now, how do we determine who's opinion is closer to fact?

Easy. You don't. If all you have is belief and opinion, sorry, no one should care. Not when it comes to core creation issues.

Do we interpret our particular favourite unquestionable authority's holy text for an answer and cherry pick the one we like? Or do we look at all of the independently verifiable evidence in an objective manner to see which position is better supported by it?

Why moan about different beliefs. when the only issue here is your so called science religion?

The calendar is not set to Darwin.

He didn't give it to me... I'm not even sure if he was a real person.

Then how do you know He didn't give it?

only for you, everyone else seems to be doing just fine with them. You're not contributing anything to our collective body of knowledge anyway, so it's not really a problem

Your collective pile of fable you mean.

- that is until you start robbing children of the curiosity of the sciences, you know, the very thing required to continue future generations of scientific contributions and progress...

I simply do not want to fill their curiosity with anti bible fables and lies and demon talk.

yet your opinion without foundation (incidentally different to every other religious opinion without foundation too) is the correct one over the consensus of millions who study and research in their respective fields of which you've studied very little to none by comparison. Even though we've made (and continue to make) tangible progress through these scientific methodologies that you don't like.

You have made precisely zero progress on creation issues. Neither can science...it is stuck in the mud til we forever ban it.

Nobody has any way to know what you believe is right.

Jesus said otherwise, we can know. I do. Your theory is wrong.

Except Science is the one true constant that is and has been independently verified all the time irrespective of the worldview and nationality of the scientist. .

Inbred circular reasoning religion is not confirmation in any way. It is delusion.

This is just weapons grade ignorance from someone who is invested in staying ignorant.

I am actually not ignorant of Satan's science. I just found out it was mere religion, and demon inspired nonsense and lies. (origin sciences).

Science isn't responsible for what extremists are capable of.

Yes it is. Science should realize sin is in the world.

Plenty of Christians (in fact more christian than not) believe in Jesus and accept the prevailing science across the board (yes, including origins).

They are as wrong as you.

...a Religion you say? Who are the Priests or unquestionable authorities of Science?

If there were no ordinances, anyone could get a paper published in a scientific journal! If there were no methodology, and doctrines, anyone could teach a science course in a university! If there were no religious zeal from science, then creation could be taught in schools. Etc.

What rituals do Scientists practice to maintain their "faith" in science?

For one thing, they scurry around frantically trying to cover up the non stop flow of mistakes and false predictions etc...and come up with a more believable story that will last long enough to teach people till they get busted again next time!

Does Science have a funny hat worn by its unquestionable authorities like all the other Religions?

 

[dad]

Just on this last bit, I can't help wondering, do Scientists send probes into space by "believing" in their religion of science? What happens if they have a crisis of faith and stop believing, do those satellites fall out of the sky? What if Scientists that put up the GPS Satellites stopped believing in Science, will Relativity stop working for them and our GPS will start sending us to the wrong places? Will Nuclear Power Stations stop giving us clean energy if physicists that built them stop believing in Science? What about all the medicines and technologies developed worldwide, will they all stop working because medical researchers and chemists stop believing in their religion of Science?

Reality doesn't stop just because you don't believe in it. Science is literally the study of reality. That your particular interpretation of your particular religion doesn't correlate with Reality isn't reality's fault.

The furthest probe is not even a light day away. Deal with that. If a fish could throw a pebble out of a fishbowl that would not mean the pebble would go to the stars.

 

[Brightmoon]

The fact that a fish can throw a pebble out of the fishbowl means that it has a better grasp of cause and effect than most science denying creationists

 

[dad]

The fact that a fish can throw a pebble out of the fishbowl means that it has a better grasp of cause and effect than most science denying creationists

Not if it thought the pebble was bound for the stars.