|
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Rolf
Guest
|
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
| |
Ads |
Advertising
Sponsor
|
|
J. J. Lodder
Guest
|
 Posted: Thu Jun 05, 2008 11:01 am Post subject: Re: Where are all the (missing) fossils? |
 |
|
Bob Casanova <nospam@buzz.off> wrote:
| Quote: |
On Wed, 4 Jun 2008 22:32:16 +0200, the following appeared in
talk.origins, posted by nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J.
Lodder):
Iain <iain_inkster@hotmail.com> wrote:
On Jun 4, 11:06 am, "Rolf" <rolf.aalb...@tele2.no> wrote:
Missing fossils? Here are some:
Liar! They're not missing!
Actually there are far too many fossils,
OK, you need to explain that one.
|
Instead of nagging about missing links
young earth creationists should worry
that there are far too many fossils
for all those animals that once owned them
to have lived in the limited timespan
between creation and flood.
Jan |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| |
Ads |
Advertising
Sponsor
|
|
J. J. Lodder
Guest
|
| Posted: Fri Jun 06, 2008 11:01 am Post subject: Re: Where are all the (missing) fossils? |
|
|
coaster <coasterpro@gmail.com> wrote:
| Quote: |
On Jun 5, 3:38 am, nos...@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J. Lodder) wrote:
Bob Casanova <nos...@buzz.off> wrote:
On Wed, 4 Jun 2008 22:32:16 +0200, the following appeared in
talk.origins, posted by nos...@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J.
Lodder):
Iain <iain_inks...@hotmail.com> wrote:
On Jun 4, 11:06 am, "Rolf" <rolf.aalb...@tele2.no> wrote:
Missing fossils? Here are some:
Liar! They're not missing!
Actually there are far too many fossils,
OK, you need to explain that one.
Instead of nagging about missing links
young earth creationists should worry
that there are far too many fossils
for all those animals that once owned them
to have lived in the limited timespan
between creation and flood.
Jan
Actually they have tried that but it seems the argument requires too
many brain cells to be firing at the same time and so it hasn't caught
on in popular evangelism.
|
Tell them about the 'Drachenloch' cave for example,
with its 100,000+ fossil cave bear skulls.
Must have been -very- crowded in there,
before the flood ended their misery,
Jan |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| |
Ads |
Advertising
Sponsor
|
|
Ron O
Guest
|
| Posted: Sun Jun 08, 2008 1:33 am Post subject: Re: Where are all the (missing) fossils? |
|
|
On Jun 5, 3:38 am, nos...@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J. Lodder) wrote:
| Quote: |
Bob Casanova <nos...@buzz.off> wrote:
On Wed, 4 Jun 2008 22:32:16 +0200, the following appeared in
talk.origins, posted by nos...@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J.
Lodder):
Iain <iain_inks...@hotmail.com> wrote:
On Jun 4, 11:06 am, "Rolf" <rolf.aalb...@tele2.no> wrote:
Missing fossils? Here are some:
Liar! They're not missing!
Actually there are far too many fossils,
OK, you need to explain that one.
Instead of nagging about missing links
young earth creationists should worry
that there are far too many fossils
for all those animals that once owned them
to have lived in the limited timespan
between creation and flood.
Jan
|
This argument was put forward during the flap with scientific
creationists in the 1980's when the creationists were trying to pass
their equal time laws. One guy used a single fossil site in Africa to
demonstrate that if all the animals represented by the fossils at this
one site hadn't lived and died for 10s of millions of years instead of
the YEC 10,000 that there would have been an animal about the size of
a sheep every square meter of the surface of the earth or something
like that. I believe that he was using the fossil bed that told us a
lot about the mammal like reptiles and their evolution through time.
I can't remember the title of the book, but I think that it was the
one with an essay by Asimov in it too.
Ron Okimoto |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| |
Ads |
Advertising
Sponsor
|
|
Harry K
Guest
|
| Posted: Sun Jun 08, 2008 2:38 am Post subject: Re: Where are all the (missing) fossils? |
|
|
On Jun 6, 1:18 pm, Frank J <f...@comcast.net> wrote:
| Quote: |
On Jun 5, 4:38 am, nos...@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J. Lodder) wrote:
Bob Casanova <nos...@buzz.off> wrote:
On Wed, 4 Jun 2008 22:32:16 +0200, the following appeared in
talk.origins, posted by nos...@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J.
Lodder):
Iain <iain_inks...@hotmail.com> wrote:
On Jun 4, 11:06 am, "Rolf" <rolf.aalb...@tele2.no> wrote:
Missing fossils? Here are some:
Liar! They're not missing!
Actually there are far too many fossils,
OK, you need to explain that one.
Instead of nagging about missing links
young earth creationists should worry
that there are far too many fossils
for all those animals that once owned them
to have lived in the limited timespan
between creation and flood.
Jan
No worry at all. Once a YEC realizes such inconveniences, he
"evolves" into a "don't ask, don't tell" IDer.- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
|
How come they haven't resorted to 'But time passed slower back then',
or '1,000 years back then were much longer'...oops, I hope they don't
pick that up.
Harry K |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| |
Ads |
Advertising
Sponsor
|
|
J. J. Lodder
Guest
|
| Posted: Sun Jun 08, 2008 11:01 am Post subject: Re: Where are all the (missing) fossils? |
|
|
Harry K <turnkey4099@hotmail.com> wrote:
| Quote: |
On Jun 6, 1:18 pm, Frank J <f...@comcast.net> wrote:
On Jun 5, 4:38 am, nos...@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J. Lodder) wrote:
Bob Casanova <nos...@buzz.off> wrote:
On Wed, 4 Jun 2008 22:32:16 +0200, the following appeared in
talk.origins, posted by nos...@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J.
Lodder):
Iain <iain_inks...@hotmail.com> wrote:
On Jun 4, 11:06 am, "Rolf" <rolf.aalb...@tele2.no> wrote:
Missing fossils? Here are some:
Liar! They're not missing!
Actually there are far too many fossils,
OK, you need to explain that one.
Instead of nagging about missing links
young earth creationists should worry
that there are far too many fossils
for all those animals that once owned them
to have lived in the limited timespan
between creation and flood.
Jan
No worry at all. Once a YEC realizes such inconveniences, he
"evolves" into a "don't ask, don't tell" IDer.- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
How come they haven't resorted to 'But time passed slower back then',
or '1,000 years back then were much longer'...oops, I hope they don't
pick that up.
|
They already have.
Some (jehovas for example) hold that 'day'
should be read as 'a very long period of undermined length',
millions of years perhaps.
However, once you give up strict literalism
you may end anywhere, even at a scientific worldview,
Jan
Jan |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| |
Ads |
Advertising
Sponsor
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
