H2Andy said
as to the other two, they were hoaxes uncovered by SCIENTISTS. hoaxes will inevitably be discovered because they don't fit in with the context of the rest of what we know...
you keep saying "some people play hoaxes using science"
and i keep saying "and then science unoveres the hoaxes and moves on"
this is like the FIFTH time you've made this argument.
Yes, and I will continue to do so, and I might add that you keep saying SCIENTISTS discovered the hoaxes/mistakes which is true in itself, but in all actuality, SCIENTISTS are the ones who are perpetrating the fraud either by deception or gullibility.
You may not remember what you said a few hundred posts ago, but you stated in reply to someone, that there had been a
FEW mistakes in identifying fossil frauds and hoaxes. What constitutes a
FEW?
But, lets be specific here. I'm not targeting science, I'm targeting ToE, Paleoanthropology, and the like.
(and it would be akin to me using people like Jim Jones and David Koresh to discredit religion. there are idiots in all fields, but the true believers disavow them)
Please do, but understand that to use such people to discredit religion as a whole would be the same as myself using Dubois to discredit science as a whole. I have not done that on this thread.
Just to note, Bringing up David Koresh will lead into an ugly debate about the US Constitution and the then sitting administration, so best to drop it since it probably violates SB's TOS.
ah... dogs are a subspecies of wolves, just like evolution said would happen if you start breeding a subset of a species for specialized results. that's evolution at work.
If WHO does the breeding?....No, thats intelligent Design at work.
Quote:
Of the 10 known examples of Archaeopteryx, one is missing, why is that?
ok, i must admit i don't know. why is that?
__________________
In 1982, Eduard Opitsch, owner of the Maxberg Archaeopteryx,
removed it from display and took it to his home. Until his death in 1991, he refused
scientists access to the specimen. Opitsch even ignored a request to borrow the specimen
briefly for the 1984 International Archaeopteryx Conference. It has never been recovered.
Goes to credibility. Why would someone do this, in light of the fact, that Archaeopteryx is the darling of evolutionary thought concerning the dino to bird link? Interesting.
The zombie post goes to credibility also, which is why I asked the rhetorical question "What am I to believe?" Although done in jest, it jeopardizes credibility given the track record over the last 100 years.
