Take The Tiktaalik Challenge

[Oncedeceived]

Don't you think that you're making some strong assertions without having all the evidence yet?

I didn't make the assertions, experts in the field did.

 

[Oncedeceived]

You might need to dig around a bit, but I'm sure that information is on the Tiktaalik website.
Tiktaalik roseae: Home

If it is in there I sure didn't find it.

 

[HitchSlap]

I didn't make the assertions, experts in the field did.

Why do you think they did that?

 

[Oncedeceived]

Why do you think they did that?

? You said I was making assertions and now you ask me why I think they did that?

 

[HitchSlap]

? You said I was making assertions and now you ask me why I think they did that?

Yep. You introduced it to the thread. Why?

 

[Papias]

Hey, I hate to butt in on the conversation, but I've read the whole thread and wanted to chime in on a point.

Overall, several people have been helpful by retracting claims which were based on incomplete information, or other similar honest mistakes. It's nice to see that, when so often people in other threads just get made.

Once wrote:

It really doesn't matter to me either way. However, usually the authority of an expert in the field is considered pretty important. It did make a difference when brought up due to my misunderstanding of the ancestor/transitional question.

Right. I agree that doing so is reasonable. Oncedeceived did not misrepresent her view (as far as I can tell). There is some evidence for some tetrapod or tetrapod like creatures just (~15 my) before Tiktaalik, and has been pointed out, that's OK from an evolution standpoint. I hope everyone can agree on both those points.

I also should point out that Oncedeceived has been quite reasonable in this discussion. It's great to see that in a discussion as charged as this topic.

Grace and hugs-

Papias

 

[Oncedeceived]

Hey, I hate to butt in on the conversation, but I've read the whole thread and wanted to chime in on a point.

Overall, several people have been helpful by retracting claims which were based on incomplete information, or other similar honest mistakes. It's nice to see that, when so often people in other threads just get made.

Once wrote:



Right. I agree that doing so is reasonable. Oncedeceived did not misrepresent her view (as far as I can tell). There is some evidence for some tetrapod or tetrapod like creatures just (~15 my) before Tiktaalik, and has been pointed out, that's OK from an evolution standpoint. I hope everyone can agree on both those points.

I also should point out that Oncedeceived has been quite reasonable in this discussion. It's great to see that in a discussion as charged as this topic.

Grace and hugs-

Papias

Well thank you Papias! I have to agree that this discussion has been profitable and one where there has been no disrespect or mocking and I applaud the non-believers for that! Kudos.

Grace and hugs right back to you!

 

[HitchSlap]

Well thank you Papias! I have to agree that this discussion has been profitable and one where there has been no disrespect or mocking and I applaud the non-believers for that! Kudos.

Grace and hugs right back to you!

Are you suggesting that believers are incapable of mocking?

Nice backhanded jab there.

 

[Oncedeceived]

Are you suggesting that believers are incapable of mocking?

Nice backhanded jab there.

Ahhhh, I'm sorry no jab intended.