|
|
|
Kacey
Skeptic Friend
USA
99 Posts |
 Posted - 05/21/2002 : 08:58:43 [Permalink]
|
quote:
However that's ok Kacey because I have found your reference you are plagiarizing from.
Kacey's plagiarized source
I hope you know that copying from a source without referencing it is a form of plagiarism and a form of scholarly dishonesty.
Later,
jmcginn
[red]Sorry, if you want to consider it plagiarism and a form of scholarly dishonesty. But I was not ready as of the time of the posting to include my source. I wanted to see your ad-hoc answers first.
The facts are, the evidence really do exist. It was amazing to me how so many of you guys claimed it didn't. I got quite a chuckle from you guys, Thanks.
BTW: The referenced site was already posted in another thread. Something about dino parks.
Kacey
I've read the end of the bible....the Christians win.
Edited by - kacey on 05/21/2002 09:00:54 |
 |
|
|
@tomic
Administrator
USA
4607 Posts |
Posted - 05/21/2002 : 09:00:54 [Permalink]
|
You chuckle over your dishonesty? I'm sure your friends and family would be impressed.
@tomic
Gravity, not just a good idea...it's the law! |
|
|
|
Trish
SFN Addict
USA
2102 Posts |
Posted - 05/21/2002 : 09:21:10 [Permalink]
|
quote:
BTW: The referenced site was already posted in another thread. Something about dino parks.
Trully, this has nothing to do with your quoting the source. If you set something down, we are left with the impression that these are actually your own thoughts, unless you quote the source of the information. You failed in this.
quote:
I love to listen to the evo criticism...all the while they create complete humanoid representations from a fragmented peice of skull cap and a portion of a jaw fossil.
While the extropolation of shape may be taken from many different peices of fossil, it is never stated that the item was found intact, that would be dishonest and not stand against scrutiny. However, reconstructing fossils is an accepted practice.
quote:
Who is this joker? I said if a new thread was started I would address the question there. Why is that rude? I think it is rather rude of you and others for trying to hi-jack this thread......which by the way is NOT about geology.
You implied somewhere you were waiting for the first ad hominen attacks from the skeptics, it would seem as though you are close to the line here.
You've repeatedly made assertions without research or reference to the research to back your assertions. You've repeatedly stated that it's up to the skeptics to prove you wrong. You've repeatedly ignored those who have pointed out the error in logic to you.
You've made the assertion - dinosaurs and humans lived together. It is you're responsibility to prove this assertion. It is also your responsibility to provide better reasoning than that which you've given. It is your responsibility to change your opinion when an hypothesis has been falsified.
As for the art work, though it is difficult to tell from an internet photo as to the acuracy and not easy to tell whether something has been altered, I would prefer to have the pigments used tested and I would prefer more than one 'expert' in the field. However, we are left with that which we are left with. I do not put past those trying to prove a point, to which they are emotionally attached, fudging things to support their position. This happens, it's human nature, however, peer review generally tends to remove this as an issue. In which peer review journal was this published?
---
...no one has ever found a 4.5 billion year old stone artifact (at the right geological stratum) with the words "Made by God."
No Sense of Obligation by Matt Young |
|
|
|
Lars_H
SFN Regular
Germany
630 Posts |
Posted - 05/21/2002 : 09:26:26 [Permalink]
|
quote:
]Sorry, if you want to consider it plagiarism and a form of scholarly dishonesty. But I was not ready as of the time of the posting to include my source. I wanted to see your ad-hoc answers first.
The facts are, the evidence really do exist. It was amazing to me how so many of you guys claimed it didn't. I got quite a chuckle from you guys, Thanks.
You were suprised that people on a skeptic site would doubt claims that you delibertly did not back up with references? Maybe you are a bit unclear on the whole concept of skepticism.
And BTW in case you had not noticed, most people here did in fact expect you to have taken your list from someplace. Quoting some supposed evidence from somewhere without referencing it, checking its origin or if it makes sense is standard operating procedure for creationist who post here.
What people doubted was that your list meant what you thaought it meant. And I guess that nobody here will drastically change his opinion or worldview as a result of the revalation of your source.
|
|
|
|
Kacey
Skeptic Friend
USA
99 Posts |
Posted - 05/21/2002 : 10:49:38 [Permalink]
|
No No No Trish. I presented 10 peices of information indicating dino and man existed together.
Then you evos said the information didn't exist. Someone beat me to the punch with the web site, but as you see...you lose. Or can you refute the information presented on the web site?
Kacey
I've read the end of the bible....the Christians win. |
|
|
|
Kacey
Skeptic Friend
USA
99 Posts |
Posted - 05/21/2002 : 10:52:41 [Permalink]
|
What people doubted was that your list meant what you thaought it meant. And I guess that nobody here will drastically change his opinion or worldview as a result of the revalation of your source.
A dinosaur could walk right up to you, slurp his tongue across your face and you still wouldn't believe.
Funny though, you can believe we use to be fish....(snicker snicker)
Kacey
I've read the end of the bible....the Christians win. |
|
|
|
@tomic
Administrator
USA
4607 Posts |
Posted - 05/21/2002 : 10:55:35 [Permalink]
|
What's going to be funny is when(if) you have kids and they have to explain how there are descended from a troll.
@tomic
Gravity, not just a good idea...it's the law! |
|
|
|
Kacey
Skeptic Friend
USA
99 Posts |
Posted - 05/21/2002 : 11:02:17 [Permalink]
|
quote:
What's going to be funny is when(if) you have kids and they have to explain how there are descended from a troll.
@tomic
Gravity, not just a good idea...it's the law!
If I'm a troll I'm doing a pretty good job. I got you and about a dozen other skep-evos hooked.
Kacey
I've read the end of the bible....the Christians win. |
|
|
|
@tomic
Administrator
USA
4607 Posts |
Posted - 05/21/2002 : 11:08:46 [Permalink]
|
Kacey, you are setting your cause back....if that's possible considering the creation side hasn't advanced in about 3,000 years. What you are doing is giving the world yet another example of creationist ignorance and deception. Is your God the God of Lies?
@tomic
Gravity, not just a good idea...it's the law! |
|
|
|
filthy
SFN Die Hard
USA
14408 Posts |
Posted - 05/21/2002 : 11:12:27 [Permalink]
|
Kacey, did you check out the link I gave you?
If so, it sounds pretty good, doesn't it? I yet wonder if this fossil actually exists, let alone the description of it. Would you like to know why I take it with a big bite of green persimmon (not salt, I have high blood pressure)? Well, I'll tell ya.
Some months ago, I read on the ICR site of a couple of guys who went to Alaska in search of unfossilized, dinosaur bones. As might be expected, after many adventures, they found a miasaure (sp) jaw. Natural bone. It was a hell of a good yarn. It was also AN OUTRAGEOUS FREAKIN' LIE PROMOTED AS THE REAL THING!!
I'm sad to say that this story has been taken down, possibly due to ridicule from even other creationists. I looked for it and it was gone. But that's not important.
What is important is the theories. Does one twist the theory to fit the facts, or does one try to distort the facts into the theory? I am wondering that if the fossil is really there, will it recieve the rigerous examination that genuine scientists would give it?
Good question, eh? You decide.
f
"He who joyfully marches in rank and file has already earned my contempt. He has been given a large brain by mistake, since for him the spinal cord would suffice."
- Albert Einstein
|
|
|
|
Antie
Skeptic Friend
USA
101 Posts |
|
|
Slater
SFN Regular
USA
1668 Posts |
Posted - 05/21/2002 : 11:15:27 [Permalink]
|
quote:
If I'm a troll I'm doing a pretty good job. I got you and about a dozen other skep-evos hooked.
Hooked? I'm intrigued, I'm having trouble believing you are for real. I know that plenty of Xians are arse holes but I can't believe that this parody of a pea brained Kristian act you are putting on is legit. You have covered every sterotype in only two days. Come clean, are you one of the guys from Landover?
-------
My business is to teach my aspirations to conform themselves to fact, not to try and make facts harmonize with my aspirations. ---Thomas Henry Huxley, 1860 |
|
|
|
Mespo_man
Skeptic Friend
USA
312 Posts |
Posted - 05/21/2002 : 11:21:17 [Permalink]
|
quote:
If I'm a troll I'm doing a pretty good job. I got you and about a dozen other skep-evos hooked. [Kacey]
Not I. Your posts are bereft of any meaningful dialog or content. I have had exchanges with other creationists who are much more lucid, thoughtful and respectful in their posts. You are none of the above.
As my mother always told me,
"If you don't have anything nice to say, don't say it".
So my parting words to you are..............
(:raig |
|
|
|
SueW0
New Member
USA
18 Posts |
Posted - 05/21/2002 : 11:27:24 [Permalink]
|
quote:
I know that plenty of Xians are arse holes but I can't believe that this parody of a pea brained Kristian act you are putting on is legit.
Kacey aka Karl Crawford put on the same act on talk.origins for ages. And he *still* sounds like a 14-year-old.
Sue
|
|
|
|
filthy
SFN Die Hard
USA
14408 Posts |
Posted - 05/21/2002 : 11:49:42 [Permalink]
|
SueWo, you don't tell me! Damn, I was having fun with Kacey. And in fact, I'd thought I thought I was conversing with a late-teen-age girl.
Well, dig me up and call me a turnip!
Come clean, are you one of the guys from Landover?
This was my second choice. Well, whether it 'tis or it 'tain't, it's been fun following the thread. It's brought forth a lot of really good comments.
Kacey, we need a rebuttal here! Is you is or is you ain't?
f, the Ever Amazed Sceptic
Edited to fix stuff, like anyone cares.
"He who joyfully marches in rank and file has already earned my contempt. He has been given a large brain by mistake, since for him the spinal cord would suffice."
- Albert Einstein
Edited by - filthy on 05/21/2002 11:56:53 |
|
|
 |
|
Topic Locked
