"There are some too who ascribe this heavenly sphere and all the worlds to spontaneity. They say that the vortex arose spontaneously, i.e. the motion that separated and arranged in its present order all that exists. This statement might well cause surprise. For they are asserting that chance is not responsible for the existence or generation of animals and plants, nature or mind or something of the kind being the cause of them (for it is not any chance thing that comes from a given seed but an olive from one kind and a man from another); and yet at the same time they assert that the heavenly sphere and the divinest of visible things arose spontaneously, having no such cause as is assigned to animals and plants. Yet if this is so, it is a fact which deserves to be dwelt upon, and something might well have been said about it. For besides the other absurdities of the statement, it is the more absurd that people should make it when they see nothing coming to be spontaneously in the heavens ...." -- Aristotle, Physics, Book II, 350 B.C.
Scientist now admit that Velociraptors never evolved wings and magically and miraculously flew off into the sunset: Bird-from-Dinosaur Theory of Evolution Challenged: Was It the Other Way Around?.
ScienceDaily (Feb. 10, 2010) — A new study just published in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences provides yet more evidence that birds did not descend from ground-dwelling theropod dinosaurs, experts say, and continues to challenge decades of accepted theories about the evolution of flight.More likely both dinosaurs and birds are descended from fire-breathing dragons.
-759725.jpg){kind=link}
18 comments:
Why did you categorize a hard-science story under "Evolution Myth" and then claim that birds and dinosaurs were "More likely...descended from fire-breathing dragons."
I ask, 'cuz not only are you wrong, but you admit to a common descent scenario.
Why don't you just learn science? Wouldn't that be easier?
Even William Dembski believes in some common descent. What's your point?
Why would anyone want to learn science when it's wrong?
William Dembski is a creationist apologist, what he beleives is irrelevant.
Science is often wrong, that's why folks keep doing it. However, it's nice to see you admitting to accepting evolution.
OIM,
Where did the fire breathing dragons came from? Which wimps brought them here? Or, did they fabricate them from some dinosaurs on the Earth, and made mistakes that became birds who can fly much better than the dragons but can't light fire?
By the way, if a dragon were to breath fire, would it not roast their lungs and innards? Now, do you see how stupid the wimps were? And, how stupider you are? Forgot! Those wimps also beamfucked you so you are supposed to be stupider than them arse-ejectors!
Scientist now admit that Velociraptors never evolved wings and magically and miraculously flew off into the sunset
No one ever said that and you misrepresent Evolution by suggesting it.
OIM, how does someone contact you with a link to an interesting story or whatever? The "contact" part of your profile just links back to the main page of your blog.
I don't know why evolution couldn't have happened in both directions. Who says the tree of life can't contain hawks evolving back into griffins?
I don't know why evolution couldn't have happened in both directions. Who says the tree of life can't contain hawks evolving back into griffins?
Evolution only has one direction. Nothing "evolves back into" something it once was. When a feature is lost, say, a certain digit or teeth, it is very difficult on the organism to handle a mutation that switches that feature back on. These mutations, called, I think, avatisms are very rare for this very reason.
I understand that chickens who grow teeth have other associated issues, for example.
But griffins? really?
QF,
Evolution can have multiple directions – like branches of a tree, all going forward. In this process, a particular function may be revived if it is beneficial for the specie’s survival or adapting to the changing environment. Recently, I saw a program on deep caves where fish discarded the eyesight as there was no light, and the sensor was useless consuming resources that are very scarce in the cave. I would not be surprised if somehow caves get lighted, these fish were to develop “eyes” again, to hunt and do stuff written up in Kamasutra (right, OIM?). One thing for sure: there is no creator messing around with fish keeping them blind in lighted caves.
Grainy space-time measured.
According to Craig Hogan, a physicist at the Fermilab particle physics lab in Batavia, Illinois, GEO600 has stumbled upon the fundamental limit of space-time - the point where space-time stops behaving like the smooth continuum Einstein described and instead dissolves into "grains", just as a newspaper photograph dissolves into dots as you zoom in. "It looks like GEO600 is being buffeted by the microscopic quantum convulsions of space-time," says Hogan.
http://www.newscientist.com/article/mg20126911.300-our-world-may-be-a-giant-hologram.html?full=true
There is no Euclidean geometry anywhere!
Hi Baron,
You can contact me here. I'd give you my email but then KV would probably spam me with immature drivel.
Hmm, okay.
Have you ever read any of Prof. Herndon's theories? I've been following your blog for a while and don't recall seeing anything.
Basically he thinks that the earth is expanding, although at a rate that is slowing and almost finished. The reason being: our earth was a gas giant which was stripped of most of it's atmosphere. With no mass to keep it compressed, it began to rebound and expand. He also discusses why science has stagnated, abiotic oil theory, debunks core convection, etc.
http://nuclearplanet.com/
OIM,
I do not need to spam you, as you yourself are doing a great job by your illusion box of clipping and cuts and pastes.
You are also stupid. You could ask Baron to give you his e-mail.
I know what OIM's email address is, it's www.cyberdudewxyz@yahoo.com
Baron,
Yes I am familiar with Dr. Herndon's theories. I have corresponded with him and you will find quotes and papers from him on the sidebar if you scroll down under "Nuclear Planet."
Jeffery- It seems you know nothing about what you are trying to defend. Evolution can have a "Reversal." A Manatee and many whale species are Prime examples as they were once tetrapods in the Paleogene!
QF- I agree as there is irrefutable proof that said "reversal" is possible. ;)
It is time to take stock: What has the intelligent design movement achieved? As science, nothing. The goal of science is to increase our understanding of the natural world, and there is not a single phenomenon that we understand better today or are likely to understand better in the future through the efforts of ID theorists. If we are to look for ID achievements, then, it must be in the realm of natural theology. And there, I think, the movement must be judged not only a failure, but a debacle.
Stephen M. Barr 2010
Jeffery- It seems you know nothing about what you are trying to defend. Evolution can have a "Reversal." A Manatee and many whale species are Prime examples as they were once tetrapods in the Paleogene!
Nope... they didn't go back to being fish, did they? They moved forward, into a form adapted for life in the water.
Post a Comment