I understand they are planning a new wing to the Denver Museum as a result of Bob’s visit. Typical of the new exhibits will be a fossilized snake practicing the tenor part for “The Marriage of Figaro”, thus positively establishing that Eve could have easily spoken to a snake. The commercial section will show a price list from Cain’s “Jurassic Blacksmith Services”, anciently located near Glen Rose, Texas. For a small fee Adam’s kids were allowed to walk in soft mud to leave eternal footprints next to the dinos that they were leading on a leash. They even found dinos were good for fording flooding rivers, almost like their tails were cedar trees.Shimei said:
Museum Curator Dr. Kirk Johnson: I Might Not Exist!
- Thread starter Jefferson
- Start date
- Status
Perhaps first you can explain why you creationists are just so downright lazy and apathetic towards the whole concept of "learning" that you can't pick up a basic book on evolution and learn for yourself? Why does everything have to be spoon-fed to you by an evolutionist on some internet forum? Why can't you be bothered to educate yourself enough to use the proper terminology so that things can be unambiguously discussed without having to dumb everything down to an elementary level? Perhaps there could be some real discussion on this site if someone were to do so. For now most of the discussion consists of evolutionists constantly having to correct every single misunderstanding that comes out of creationists mouths. And what's the result?
...
If scientists are making this claim you know that there is sufficient evidence, at least in their minds, to warrant such a claim. Stop being so lazy and look it up yourself. A simple internet search reveals a ton of literature on the topic. There are also many sites devoted to this topic. http://www.palaeos.com/Vertebrates/Bones/Teeth/Teeth.html came up under a basic, general search through google. There's even a book which is devoted soley to the development, function, and evolution of teeth http://www.cambridge.org/catalogue/catalogue.asp?isbn=0521570115. If you're so interested why don't you head down the local university library and look it up? Or would that be too much work for you?
From Shimei:
If you are really interested in seeing if there might be some credible reasons for scales becoming teeth, I would suggest you ask an expert. How about asking Denis Lamoureux? He has PhDs in biology and in dentistry. And, if it helps, he is also a faithful conservative Christian, with a PhD in theology. And an ardent supporter of evolution, with, I might suggest, a bit more technical insight than you and certainly less desire to suck up to a minister who elevates ridicule to a church sacrament.
ThePhy said:
Is Denis Lamoureux sure he exists?
(someone was gonna say it...)
:think:
Nope. Doesn't help a bit, but thanks for trying to help!
Phy, you surprise me. Just when I start to think you are only here to mock Christianity every chance you get, you go and do something like this! Maybe I have misjudged you.
I understand that you favor Lamoureux's well thought out ideas on creation, but I'll stick with Moses' account. Jesus (the guy Christians believe) gave Moses quite a bit of credibility by referring to him here and there in a big book that lots of Christians read. I don't remember any part that mentioned a "Denis L" trumping Moses later.
Thanks again!
V45
From Crash:
But to answer your question – Enyart already asked me that, and I answered. Did you not like my answer?
If you ever pretend to wanting to understand science, instead of your oh-so-clever word games, both Johnny and I have given you some leads.
I see you have learned well from Bob Enyart. Not that I would consider that a compliment.
But to answer your question – Enyart already asked me that, and I answered. Did you not like my answer?
If you ever pretend to wanting to understand science, instead of your oh-so-clever word games, both Johnny and I have given you some leads.
From Vaquero45:
I just thought some of you people might be confident enough to dare step away from the Bible and see if a literal reading of Genesis really fits with the real world. But hey, there is emotional comfort in not peeking beyond the borders of the Bible. Just think, finding one thing in it isn’t as literally true as you thought means the next might be also be not true, and the next, and pretty soon the whole thing collapses. Are you really so scared that your Bible is just a big house of cards that it all stands or falls together?
Excuse me, but I can’t in good conscience prostitute my intellect to protect dogma. If you can – well …
Yeah, I have heard of that book. Even have a copy. Several copies – from a number of different translators, so I am a bit aware of it. I even read it. Cover to cover. Multiple times. Spent a whole lot of time in Bible studies, Sunday Schools, etc.
I just thought some of you people might be confident enough to dare step away from the Bible and see if a literal reading of Genesis really fits with the real world. But hey, there is emotional comfort in not peeking beyond the borders of the Bible. Just think, finding one thing in it isn’t as literally true as you thought means the next might be also be not true, and the next, and pretty soon the whole thing collapses. Are you really so scared that your Bible is just a big house of cards that it all stands or falls together?
Excuse me, but I can’t in good conscience prostitute my intellect to protect dogma. If you can – well …
ThePhy said:
Ok man, I can see that didn't get us anywhere. I have an idea though.
If you are really interested in seeing if there might be some credible reasons to believe the Young Earth Creationist Biblical account, I will try to conjure up a guy who got an A+ at evolution school. And, if it helps, I'll make sure my guy is a devout atheist. The punch line though, will be when I tell you he strongly supports Young Earth Creation! I figure you would take that guy VERY seriously, no?
From Vaquero45:
It sounds like you think I will be converted by credentials rather than evidence. Not so. If you, or Enyart, or Behe, or your friend come up with the goods, I would love to see them. I am willing to consider evidence on its own terms. If it clearly conflicts with my existing ideas, I will necessarily reevaluate my stance. Can you say the same for any Old Earth evidence you might receive?
ThePhy said:
The science fiction museum stating that teeth evolved from scales and they stated this as a fact, not a theory.
Do you agree that it is a little misleading to say such a thing and then have no evidence to back up the claim? I mean not even a simple demonstration (perhaps some cartoon illustrations) as to how this occurred?
Should they add a little asterisk at the end of the statement that says * check out Denis Lamoureux, he has a PHD and he is a Christian Dentist.
The burden is on your side, not Young Earth Creationists.
This whole debate has nothing to do with Enyart, so I don’t see the point of bringing him up again.
BTW, another dentist went on this same tour and couldn’t stop laughing at such an absurd statement. Scales developed a nervous system. Ok, how does that happen again? We need actual evidence, not some far out theories from Lamoureux or anyone else.
Shimei said:
The burden is always on the YECers, unfortunately they do not have the evidence to sustain their burden.
This debate has a lot to do with Pastor Enyart. His response to the statement that teeth evolved from scales started this. His knowledge of science is abysmal. Instead of trying to understand the teeth evolved from scales concept or determine if there is any basis for that or another source he joked about it. Then his groupies join in.
aharvey
New member
Wow, usually museums aren't so bold as to state things like "This is a fact, not a theory"!Shimei said:
I agree, if they are going to say "This is a fact, not a theory," they should be prepared to back it up. So if they did say "This is a fact, not a theory," but they didn't provide any evidence or illustration of this non-theoretical fact, then what did they do with all that exhibit space on the evolution of teeth from scales?Shimei said:
Um, I'm not sure how much checking you've done, but fish scales are innervated. There are rather a lot of studies that have shown this and used it to address other topics. So it might be time for you and "the other dentist" to find a different reason you think the evolution of teeth from scales is so obviously absurd.Shimei said:
- Status