Won't some half sensible creationist please step in and give Huggybear the lolcat version of his approach?
Kreashumism...ur doin it rong.
Kreashumism...ur doin it rong.
Upvote
0
Apparently, huggy thinks only others' quotes speak for themselves.
Where do you get those irony meters again?
If you want to discuss why you are wrong about this I would be happy to debate you. I wrote my degree thesis about the post ice age adaptive radiation in the late Pre-Cambrian early Cambrian.
There has been a lot of work in the last decade that has really illuminated this period of the earth's palaeontological history.
This symposium from 2000:
http://www.pnas.org/cgi/content/full/97/9/4424
shows how far we are coming and in the time since even more discoveries have been found illuminating this period.
We are now starting to find many ancestral organisms to those that are found in the Cambrian.
We have always known the Cambrian "explosion" was more about preservation than reality, with enhanced techniques for recovering soft bodied faunas we are now starting to be able to show that there are complex soft bodied precursors to the shelled faunas of the Cambrian.
Spriggina springs to mind immediately:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spriggina
I imagine you will dodge actually discussing the reality of Cambrian palaeontology because you know nothing about and you have no desire to learn anything about it as your world view would inevitably collapse if you had to confront reality.
If the best troll is one no one realizes is a troll, then how do we determine who the really good trolls are? In any case, your description of what a troll is fits 90% of creationists who post here. Are you claiming the vast majority of creationists who post here are trolls?if someone continually posts redicoulous things that will get people upset (due to it's immense stupidity), that person is a troll.
I once saw a quote that said "a good troll is someone no one realize is a troll." an example---dad. he ingeniously had people replying, getting mad at, and spending countless hours reading crap. it took forever before someone finally said "wait a darn minute.....he might just be trolling."
this guy is just another having fun at our expense.
there aren't many creationists here on this board. most are athiests. that 90 percent figure is kinda misleading.If the best troll is one no one realizes is a troll, then how do we determine who the really good trolls are? In any case, your description of what a troll is fits 90% of creationists who post here. Are you claiming the vast majority of creationists who post here are trolls?
if someone continually posts redicoulous things that will get people upset (due to it's immense stupidity), that person is a troll.
I once saw a quote that said "a good troll is someone no one realize is a troll." an example---dad. he ingeniously had people replying, getting mad at, and spending countless hours reading crap. it took forever before someone finally said "wait a darn minute.....he might just be trolling."
this guy is just another having fun at our expense.
there aren't many creationists here on this board. most are athiests. that 90 percent figure is kinda misleading.
No, to be a good troll, you have to firstly be a troll. You have to deceive people - you can't actually take your own trash seriously.
You apparently haven't seen the full history of dad's posts. Most people mention the possibility of a troll at some point early on, but us seasoned dad-ers know such mentions aren't going to do any good.
If the best troll is one no one realizes is a troll, then how do we determine who the really good trolls are?