Antievolution.org :: Antievolution.org Discussion Board The Critic's Resource on Antievolution

Antievolution.org Discussion Board > From the Panda's Thumb > After the Bar Closes... > AF Dave Has More Questions About Apes

Pages: (23) < ... 16 17 18 19 20 [21] 22 23 >

Arden Chatfield Posts: 6657 Joined: Jan. 2006 (Permalink) Posted: May 22 2006,06:03    Quote (Rilke's Granddaughter @ May 22 2006,11:01) Ed Brayton makes a similar (and as always, excellent observation):   Quote There are some people who are so ridiculous that it would be impossible to invent them if they didn't actually exist. Larry Fafarman is one of them. A psychologist would have a field day with someone so utterly convinced of his own importance that he prefers to make a fool of himself for attention rather than risk non-existence.  What difference, really, is there between Dave and Larry?  Has anybody noticed one? Their writing styles are pretty different. Plus, Larry almost never mentions Jesus. And Dave lacks Larry's obsession with lawyers. -------------- "Rich is just mad because he thought all titties had fur on them until last week when a shorn transvestite ruined his childhood dreams by jumping out of a spider man cake and man boobing him in the face lips." - Erasmus

afdave Posts: 1621 Joined: April 2006 (Permalink) Posted: May 22 2006,06:04    Quote I think it's gotten to the point where Dave now thinks that if he admits a mistake on ANYTHING that his Christian arguments are all threatened. Oh really?  How do you explain my very forthright and honest concession that I was wrong about the AIG-chimp-chromosome thing? Arden, precisely the REVERSE of what you say is true.   YOU are the one that will never admit defeat no matter how looney you look. -------------- A DILEMMA FOR THE COMMITTED NATURALIST A Hi-tech alien spaceship lands on earth ... DESIGNED. A Hi-tech alien rotary motor found in a cell ... NOT DESIGNED. http://afdave.wordpress.com/....ess.com

normdoering Posts: 287 Joined: July 2005 (Permalink) Posted: May 22 2006,06:07    Quote (afdave @ May 22 2006,10:24) Come on guys. Face it.  Apes and humans have some striking similarities, I agree.  Apes and humans both have what appears to be a broken GULO gene.  So what?  This does not prove Common Descent. All by itself, a broken GULO gene does not prove much of anything -- but it is one line of evidence. Dave, lets get back to something you brought up earlier, the term "kinds." According to you, a monkey or chimp is one "kind" and a human being another kind, right? So, what exactly is a kind? Are horses, donkeys, mules and jackasses all part of one kind, or are they different kinds? Are birds all a kind, including or excluding penguins? Are dogs and wolves part of a single kind? Could bears be part of that kind?

Arden Chatfield Posts: 6657 Joined: Jan. 2006 (Permalink) Posted: May 22 2006,06:08    Quote (afdave @ May 22 2006,11:04) Quote I think it's gotten to the point where Dave now thinks that if he admits a mistake on ANYTHING that his Christian arguments are all threatened. Oh really?  How do you explain my very forthright and honest concession that I was wrong about the AIG-chimp-chromosome thing? Arden, precisely the REVERSE of what you say is true.   YOU are the one that will never admit defeat no matter how looney you look. Ah, I missed that. Sorry. And I'm glad you admitted it. So, now, in an attempt to prove to us that you're not 'looney', are you now willing to admit you were wrong on your linguistic statements, the founding fathers all being Christians, a Young Earth, Noah's flood, and scientists all 'jumping ship' on evolution? 'Cause none of those things are true, either... -------------- "Rich is just mad because he thought all titties had fur on them until last week when a shorn transvestite ruined his childhood dreams by jumping out of a spider man cake and man boobing him in the face lips." - Erasmus

Rilke's Granddaughter Posts: 311 Joined: Jan. 2005 (Permalink) Posted: May 22 2006,06:13    Quote (Arden Chatfield @ May 22 2006,11:08) Quote (afdave @ May 22 2006,11:04)   Quote I think it's gotten to the point where Dave now thinks that if he admits a mistake on ANYTHING that his Christian arguments are all threatened. Oh really?  How do you explain my very forthright and honest concession that I was wrong about the AIG-chimp-chromosome thing? Arden, precisely the REVERSE of what you say is true.   YOU are the one that will never admit defeat no matter how looney you look. Ah, I missed that. Sorry. And I'm glad you admitted it. So, now, in an attempt to prove to us that you're not 'looney', are you now willing to admit you were wrong on your linguistic statements, the founding fathers all being Christians, a Young Earth, Noah's flood, and scientists all 'jumping ship' on evolution? 'Cause none of those things are true, either... Yes, but where did he admit it?  I can't seem to find any forthright and honest statements in any of Dave's posts.

afdave Posts: 1621 Joined: April 2006 (Permalink) Posted: May 22 2006,06:20    Quote All by itself, a broken GULO gene does not prove much of anything -- but it is one line of evidence. Thank you, Norm.  Would you please explain this to your friends and to Dr. Max?  They don't seem to get this simple point. As for kinds, we will be getting into them shortly. Quote Ah, I missed that. Sorry. And I'm glad you admitted it. So, now, in an attempt to prove to us that you're not 'looney', are you now willing to admit you were wrong on your linguistic statements, the founding fathers all being Christians, a Young Earth, Noah's flood, and scientists all 'jumping ship' on evolution? 'Cause none of those things are true, either... No.  I won the Portuguese thing thanks to Rilke's Wikipedia article, my Medieval Encyclopedia and your own admission.  You can go argue that one against me with Rilke until you are blue in the face if you want.  But you'll be talking to the wind. As for the rest, you'll have to earn victory, point by point.  If you win a point, I will concede.  I hope you will be so honorable as well. -------------- A DILEMMA FOR THE COMMITTED NATURALIST A Hi-tech alien spaceship lands on earth ... DESIGNED. A Hi-tech alien rotary motor found in a cell ... NOT DESIGNED. http://afdave.wordpress.com/....ess.com

normdoering Posts: 287 Joined: July 2005 (Permalink) Posted: May 22 2006,06:34    Quote (afdave @ May 22 2006,11:20) As for kinds, we will be getting into them shortly. When you do, explain this kind: It is Thylacinus, an extinct marsupial wolf. Is is part of wolf/dog kind?

Tom Ames Posts: 238 Joined: Dec. 2002 (Permalink) Posted: May 22 2006,06:40    Note to AFDave: The GULO pseudogene is evidence for the common ancestry and recent divergence of humans and the other great apes. It is not "proof of" same, and not considered as such by careful scientists. You're engaging in an intellectually dishonest rhetorical tactic that Phil Johnson likes to use. He specializes in nibbling at the margins of specific pieces of evidence (never looking at the totality) and then pretending that he's "disproven" something. Or when it turns out that the evidence is correct, he diminishes its importance by pointing out that it's only one piece of evidence. Pointing out that the GULO story does not by itself "prove" the ancestry of humans is a red herring: no-one claims that it is sufficient evidence. And you can get any biologist to "concede" this. But so what? It strongly supports a particular hypothesis. And thousands of other observations do too. -------------- -Tom Ames

Arden Chatfield Posts: 6657 Joined: Jan. 2006 (Permalink) Posted: May 22 2006,06:42    This is just priceless... Quote No.  I won the Portuguese thing thanks to Rilke's Wikipedia article, my Medieval Encyclopedia and your own admission.  You can go argue that one against me with Rilke until you are blue in the face if you want.  But you'll be talking to the wind. Okay, Dave, please tell us why you 'won the Portuguese thing' because of the Wikipedia article, and how you have addressed the objections to your argument. I'm dying to hear it. And also please tell us why the linguists are all wrong on this while you are right. -------------- "Rich is just mad because he thought all titties had fur on them until last week when a shorn transvestite ruined his childhood dreams by jumping out of a spider man cake and man boobing him in the face lips." - Erasmus

argystokes Posts: 766 Joined: Jan. 2006 (Permalink) Posted: May 22 2006,06:43    Ah, ye olde Thylacine.  Here are some videos of the last known survivor. (Wipes tear) -------------- "Why waste time learning, when ignorance is instantaneous?" -Calvin

BWE Posts: 1902 Joined: Jan. 2006 (Permalink) Posted: May 22 2006,06:52    DDDDDDDDDAAAAAAAAAAAVVVVVVVEEEEEEEEE!!!!!!!! AAAAAAARRRRRRREEEEEE YYYYYOOOOOUUUU TTTTTTAAAAAAKIKKKIIIINNNNGG MMMMMYYYYYYY BBBBEEEEEEETTTTTT ??? When do we start? -------------- Who said that ev'ry wish would be heard and answered When wished on the morning star Somebody thought of that, and someone believed it Look what it's done so far The Daily Wingnut

Russell Posts: 1082 Joined: April 2005 (Permalink) Posted: May 22 2006,06:52    Quote All by itself, a broken GULO gene does not prove much of anything -- but it is one line of evidence. Quote Thank you, Norm.  Would you please explain this to your friends and to Dr. Max?  They don't seem to get this simple point. Surely, davy, surely after pages and pages of discussion on this, you're not going to pretend that Max's only evidence is "a broken GULO gene". Surely you're not going to ignore the fact that the nature of the "breaks" in the gene reflects and was predicted by the common descent view, and not the common design view. Surely you're not going to do that, are you? -------------- Must... not... scratch... mosquito bite.

Rilke's Granddaughter Posts: 311 Joined: Jan. 2005 (Permalink) Posted: May 22 2006,07:01    I'm just going to cross-post this, since apparently Dave is engaging in his usual (and unChristian) practice of ignoring threads or posts in which his position is demolished. Quote What's most amusing about Dave at the moment is the fact that he's struggling so badly making an argument: the accuracy of his original statement having been swiftly and thoroughly shown to be non-existent. Let's consider: what would it take to show that Portuguese is a mixture of French and Spanish? Option 1) A linguistic history of the language showing that it had developed from these two other tongues. Unfortunately option 1 is eliminated because these languages did not exist when Portuguese developed. Option 2) Show, by linguistic analysis, that Portuguese is comprised of an admixture of French and Spanish vocabulary; French and Spanish grammar; and French and Spanish pronunciation. Unfortunately, option 2 is eliminated because Dave can't actually show those things. Now Dave, we realize that you can continue to make yourself look like a fool by persisting in your inability to admit that your first statement was idiotically wrong; your second statement a cover-up AND idiotically wrong; and your continuing statements a cover-up, irrelevant, AND idiotically wrong. Or you can demonstrate some intellectual credibility and Christian ethics by admitting that you were mistaken, that you lied, and that you're ignorant. Feel free to start any time.   Remember - we are trying to help you.  I know that arguments and discussion with adults can be trying and hard, but if you just persevere and do your homework, you'll be ready for it! Dave, doesn't it bother you to be wrong all the time?  Wouldn't you like to be right occasionally?  Do you really like looking like a fool?

Russell Posts: 1082 Joined: April 2005 (Permalink) Posted: May 22 2006,07:02    Quote Oh really?  How do you explain my very forthright and honest concession that I was wrong about the AIG-chimp-chromosome thing? I chalk it up to having absolutely no choice. But what was AiG's response when you confronted them on that? I'm really curious. Quote You can go argue that one against me with Rilke until you are blue in the face if you want.  But you'll be talking to the wind. or a brick wall, as the case may be. But just for the record, it's not just one or two "holdouts" - so far as I can tell no one here other than you thinks you "won" that little dust-up. -------------- Must... not... scratch... mosquito bite.

ericmurphy Posts: 2460 Joined: Oct. 2005 (Permalink) Posted: May 22 2006,07:37    Here's the problem, Dave. Say I just stumbled on this site by accident (maybe I was looking for a Portuguese recipe for Paella or something). I kind of wandered around, couldn't find the recipe I was looking for, but got interested in the discussions anyway. Maybe I didn't know anything about science, or religion, but were able to critically weigh evidence and make credibility assessments (maybe I worked for a law firm). After catching up on all the various threads, and evaluating the evidence proffered (or failed to be proffered) for various positions, I came across a passage like this:   Quote (afdave @ May 22 2006,05:42) The most credible sounding one I've read yet is Dr. Max's article which is being discussed on this thread, but as it turns out, after much debating all around the mulberry bush, we are finally back to the following statement by Jeannot which proves my point and destroys Dr. Max's argument completely.  I'm going to put this in lights so that no one will miss it. ****************************************************************** [b]Jeannot said ...     Quote For the last time, you can't consider the loss of function alone as a valid evidence for common descent, because hundreds of mutations can break a gene. </b> ****************************************************************** One more time for emphasis ... [b]For the last time, you can't consider the loss of function alone as a valid evidence for common descent, because hundreds of mutations can break a gene.</b> I'd be thinking, is this guy delusional? I have to say it's just astounding how you can have your positions annihilated, over and over again, and yet still think you're winning. I don't think I've ever seen anyone so capable of self-delusion. Do you honestly think you've proved a single point you've raised? At this point it's pretty clear that you're never, ever going provide any actual evidence for any of your contentions. But to think you've actually disproven anyone else's positions…well, all I can say is that you're deeply delusional. -------------- 2006 MVD award for most dogged defense of scientific sanity "Atheism is a religion the same way NOT collecting stamps is a hobby." —Scott Adams

ericmurphy Posts: 2460 Joined: Oct. 2005 (Permalink) Posted: May 22 2006,07:47    In my experience, when someone says something like this:   Quote (afdave @ May 22 2006,05:42) Yes, I've read all those articles that 'blow the arguments out of the water' at T.O.  They are quite lame. …they clearly neither understood the article nor could think of any way to rebut it. Oh, and Dave—word to the wise: there's more to the demolition of creationist arguments than Talk Origins. You might want to look at the top of this page for another good source for why Behe, Dembski, et. al. are clueless when it comes to evolution. -------------- 2006 MVD award for most dogged defense of scientific sanity "Atheism is a religion the same way NOT collecting stamps is a hobby." —Scott Adams

jeannot Posts: 1201 Joined: Jan. 2006 (Permalink) Posted: May 22 2006,07:57    Quote ... the primates that share more errors are precisely the ones that were already known to be the closest, i.e. chimps and humans. Then comes others apes and monkeys, who share fewer errors with humans and chimps, as predicted by previous phylogenies. Dave, either you don't understand what is written here, or you are dishonest What is the part you don't understand?

ericmurphy Posts: 2460 Joined: Oct. 2005 (Permalink) Posted: May 22 2006,07:58    Quote (afdave @ May 22 2006,11:20)     Quote All by itself, a broken GULO gene does not prove much of anything -- but it is one line of evidence. Thank you, Norm.  Would you please explain this to your friends and to Dr. Max?  They don't seem to get this simple point. Dave, at the risk of repeating what's already been repeated to you ad nauseum (is that retching I hear over there in the corner?) let me try to explain this to you again. The fact that the GULO gene is broken in both humans and chimps does not prove much of anything. The fact that the GULO gene in humans and chimps is broken in the same way is evidence of common descent. The fact that there are many, many stretches of DNA in humans and chimps that are not subject to selective pressure that are identical is conclusive evidence of common ancestry. Yeah, sure, common design could explain the same thing. Common design can explain anything, because it's unfalsifiable. Presumably this will be the last time anyone explains this to you, because we're all sick and tired of repeating ourselves.   Quote As for the rest, you'll have to earn victory, point by point.  If you win a point, I will concede.  I hope you will be so honorable as well. Is this your concession that you have yet to win a point, Dave? Because you haven't. -------------- 2006 MVD award for most dogged defense of scientific sanity "Atheism is a religion the same way NOT collecting stamps is a hobby." —Scott Adams

Russell Posts: 1082 Joined: April 2005 (Permalink) Posted: May 22 2006,08:00    Quote …well, all I can say is that you're deeply delusional. I take it, then, you don't think much of my Andy Kaufman hypothesis? -------------- Must... not... scratch... mosquito bite.

jeannot Posts: 1201 Joined: Jan. 2006 (Permalink) Posted: May 22 2006,08:09    Quote (ericmurphy @ May 22 2006,12:58) common design could explain the same thing. Dave, are errors in broken genes part of a design?

ericmurphy Posts: 2460 Joined: Oct. 2005 (Permalink) Posted: May 22 2006,08:11    Quote (Russell @ May 22 2006,13:00) Quote …well, all I can say is that you're deeply delusional. I take it, then, you don't think much of my Andy Kaufman hypothesis? Actually, a state of deep self-delusion probably is evidence in support of your Andy Kaufmann hypothesis. -------------- 2006 MVD award for most dogged defense of scientific sanity "Atheism is a religion the same way NOT collecting stamps is a hobby." —Scott Adams

afdave Posts: 1621 Joined: April 2006 (Permalink) Posted: May 22 2006,08:35    Quote DDDDDDDDDAAAAAAAAAAAVVVVVVVEEEEEEEEE!!!!!!!! AAAAAAARRRRRRREEEEEE YYYYYOOOOOUUUU TTTTTTAAAAAAKIKKKIIIINNNNGG MMMMMYYYYYYY BBBBEEEEEEETTTTTT When do we start? NNNNNNNNNNNNOOOOOOOOOOO!  I won already ... now be a gentleman and go help Rilke crawl out from under that big branch I sawed off.  I think she hit her head when she fell because she's hallucinating now. Quote Surely, davy, surely after pages and pages of discussion on this, you're not going to pretend that Max's only evidence is "a broken GULO gene". I'm sure he has many more reasons why he thinks he is related to chimps, but the item of discussion on this thread most recently is THIS piece of evidence.  And let me say again ... I agree, it's a piece of evidence.  But it argues equally well for both Common Descent and Common Design.  Remember the Aerostar and the Fiesta? Quote But just for the record, it's not just one or two "holdouts" - so far as I can tell no one here other than you thinks you "won" that little dust-up. most of them probably do agree with me, but they wouldn't dare admit it and betray "the team." Quote For you to be correct I would have had to have said "I haven't read Dr Max's argument but if you think you have refuted his argument/article you are sadly mistaken." whereas I actually said "I haven't read Dr Max's argument but if you think you have refuted the claim that the GULO gene does not support common descent you are sadly mistaken." Do you see the subtle but important difference. Now that you point it out, yes.  I'll concede there was a subtle (very subtle) difference in the two statements. Tom Ames ...   Quote The GULO pseudogene is evidence for the common ancestry and recent divergence of humans and the other great apes. It is not "proof of" same, and not considered as such by careful scientists. You're engaging in an intellectually dishonest rhetorical tactic that Phil Johnson likes to use. He specializes in nibbling at the margins of specific pieces of evidence (never looking at the totality) and then pretending that he's "disproven" something. Or when it turns out that the evidence is correct, he diminishes its importance by pointing out that it's only one piece of evidence. Pointing out that the GULO story does not by itself "prove" the ancestry of humans is a red herring: no-one claims that it is sufficient evidence. And you can get any biologist to "concede" this. But so what? It strongly supports a particular hypothesis. And thousands of other observations do too. Thank you Tom, for agreeing with me in your first paragraph.  As for your second paragraph, if you will read this whole thread, I have looked at the totality of the Ape/Human ancestor question on two separate occasions.  To review briefly, the problems are (1) Lack of 'Hominid Civilizations' existing today, (2) Completely unconvincing fossil record, and (3) Major non-physical differences between apes and humans.  I am not engaging in intellectual dishonesty.  I focused heavily on the GULO issue because several people kept throwing it in my face in several different threads.  I simply took the challenge ... And won! Now let's see how intellectually honest all of you are ... -------------- A DILEMMA FOR THE COMMITTED NATURALIST A Hi-tech alien spaceship lands on earth ... DESIGNED. A Hi-tech alien rotary motor found in a cell ... NOT DESIGNED. http://afdave.wordpress.com/....ess.com

Arden Chatfield Posts: 6657 Joined: Jan. 2006 (Permalink) Posted: May 22 2006,08:55    Now I remember why I paid no attention to most of AFDave's vanity threads. This person is an ignorant, delusional liar, and he's unteachable. Unless he says something flamboyantly stupid or dishonest about the linguistic arguments again, I'm not responding to him again. -------------- "Rich is just mad because he thought all titties had fur on them until last week when a shorn transvestite ruined his childhood dreams by jumping out of a spider man cake and man boobing him in the face lips." - Erasmus

ericmurphy Posts: 2460 Joined: Oct. 2005 (Permalink) Posted: May 22 2006,08:59    For those of you here who are MPFC fans, Dave reminds me of that scene in Monty Python and the Holy Grail where a knight is blocking King Arthur's passage across a narrow bridge. He won't budge, so Art has to take a sword to him. In the battle, Art chops off the guy's arms and one of his legs, leaving the poor bastard standing there hopping on one foot. Arthur shoves the guy out of the way and continues on his path. The amputated knight yells out, "He's running away!" King Arthur says, "What are you going to do, bleed on me?" Somehow, that scene reminds me of Dave, who's standing there, armless and short of a leg, hemorrhaging onto the ground, still claiming he's "won." He thinks the rest of us won't admit he's won because we're, like, ashamed or something. Uh, Dave…? See those limbs lying on the ground over there? -------------- 2006 MVD award for most dogged defense of scientific sanity "Atheism is a religion the same way NOT collecting stamps is a hobby." —Scott Adams

normdoering Posts: 287 Joined: July 2005 (Permalink) Posted: May 22 2006,09:00    Quote (afdave @ May 22 2006,13:35) I have looked at the totality of the Ape/Human ancestor question on two separate occasions.  To review briefly, the problems are (1) Lack of 'Hominid Civilizations' existing today, ... Dave, I totally annihilated that claim of yours. There were other tool using primates, and our first human ancestors didn't live much differently than they did. Did you ever read those posts?

stevestory Posts: 13407 Joined: Oct. 2005 (Permalink) Posted: May 22 2006,09:01    Quote I agree, it's a piece of evidence.  But it argues equally well for both Common Descent and Common Design. I thought he said, early on, that this single fact refutes common descent?

Rilke's Granddaughter Posts: 311 Joined: Jan. 2005 (Permalink) Posted: May 22 2006,09:06    Dave, I realize you have reading comprehension problems and you are a chronic liar.  (Naughty, that: Jesus is weeping for you right now).  So I'll repeat this for your benefit. What's most amusing about Dave at the moment is the fact that he's struggling so badly making an argument: the accuracy of his original statement having been swiftly and thoroughly shown to be non-existent. Let's consider: what would it take to show that Portuguese is a mixture of French and Spanish? Option 1) A linguistic history of the language showing that it had developed from these two other tongues. Unfortunately option 1 is eliminated because these languages did not exist when Portuguese developed. Option 2) Show, by linguistic analysis, that Portuguese is comprised of an admixture of French and Spanish vocabulary; French and Spanish grammar; and French and Spanish pronunciation. Unfortunately, option 2 is eliminated because Dave can't actually show those things. Now Dave, we realize that you can continue to make yourself look like a fool by persisting in your inability to admit that your first statement was idiotically wrong; your second statement a cover-up AND idiotically wrong; and your continuing statements a cover-up, irrelevant, AND idiotically wrong. Or you can demonstrate some intellectual credibility and Christian ethics by admitting that you were mistaken, that you lied, and that you're ignorant. Feel free to start any time.   Remember - we are trying to help you.  I know that arguments and discussion with adults can be trying and hard, but if you just persevere and do your homework, you'll be ready for it! Dave, doesn't it bother you to be wrong all the time?  Wouldn't you like to be right occasionally?  Do you really like looking like a fool? I mean, if you honestly enjoy looking stupid, we're more than happy to oblidge: you're fun to laugh at, I'll grant you that.

Faid Posts: 1143 Joined: Mar. 2006 (Permalink) Posted: May 22 2006,09:44    [quote=afdave,May 22 2006,10:24][/quote]   Quote You guys cannot get your story straight.  You say it's the similarities in the broken part, Jeannot says "you can't consider the loss of function alone as a valid evidence for common descent, because hundreds of mutations can break a gene." Oh boy why do I even bother... Dave, my tiny inadequate brain, deluded by Darwinism, Methodologicalnaturalismismsm, Atheism and, probably, Marxism-Leninism, simply cannot grasp the contradiction you find so obvious here. Care to enlighten me?   Quote Great.  And I'll back off my "liar" claim for the T.O folks.  I will content myself to think they are just ignorant. Sure, dave. As soon as you also demonstrate why. Quote I focused heavily on the GULO issue because several people kept throwing it in my face in several different threads.  I simply took the challenge ... And won! Now let's see how intellectually honest all of you are ... ...Because, as we all saw, you just showed how intellectually honest you are. -------------- A look into DAVE HAWKINS' sense of honesty: "The truth is that ALL mutations REDUCE information" "...mutations can add information to a genome.  And remember, I have never said that this is not possible."

afdave Posts: 1621 Joined: April 2006 (Permalink) Posted: May 22 2006,09:58    Quote Dave, I totally annihilated that claim of yours. There were other tool using primates, and our first human ancestors didn't live much differently than they did. Did you ever read those posts?[/quote] Of course I read your post.  I always read your posts.  You, Chris, Jeannot, Tom, Incorygible and several others say very coherent things and you don't get into the goofy name calling which just makes people look vacuous.  I can tell also that you are very sincere in what you believe.  I respect what you have to say even though I disagree with your conclusions. I know you responded to my claim of 'no hominid civilizations' but I don't agree that some bones and cave writing is evidence for this.  My contention is that if apes and humans have a common ancestor, there should be lots of 'beetle brow civilizations' all over the earth with half ape-men who grunt a lot and have a simple language and are at some stage between chimps and humans.  These 'people' should be living today if evolution were true. (Rilke-- I'm glad to see you believe in Jesus now ... maybe you could tell BWE about Him) -------------- A DILEMMA FOR THE COMMITTED NATURALIST A Hi-tech alien spaceship lands on earth ... DESIGNED. A Hi-tech alien rotary motor found in a cell ... NOT DESIGNED. http://afdave.wordpress.com/....ess.com

Drew Headley Posts: 152 Joined: Mar. 2006 (Permalink) Posted: May 22 2006,10:05    Quote most of them probably do agree with me, but they wouldn't dare admit it and betray "the team." I will come out and say you have not convinced me at all. In fact, all the books I have read on the topic say that the only significant French influence on Portuguese came much later than the years you gave. My girlfriend who is a linguistics major also said you are wrong for the same reasons given by many in this thread (independent of reading this).

Pages: (23) < ... 16 17 18 19 20 [21] 22 23 >

Track this topic	Email this topic	Print this topic

© 2002-2009 Antievolution.org Powered by Ikonboard 3.0.2a © 2001 Ikonboard