|
|
|
furshur
SFN Regular
USA
1536 Posts |
 Posted - 06/22/2007 : 11:38:21 [Permalink]
|
Filthy, your links the fossilmuseum.net are not opening.
It sure took a lot of argument to present the evidence that the cartoon cutout wings are indeed feathers. Thanks for the information. |
Yes it did. And I am sure you found it most enjoyable, where as I found it quite tedious.
I am glad to see that you took my advice and have decided to concede an obvious point now and again to hide the fact that you are a troll. Unfortunately it is too little, too late.
|
If I knew then what I know now then I would know more now than I know. |
 |
|
|
Kil
Evil Skeptic
USA
13481 Posts |
Posted - 06/22/2007 : 15:45:50 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by JEROME DA GNOME
"The fossil record of feathers presently yields no evidence on the origin of feathers that cannot be better obtained from living birds. The known dinosaur integument provides a poor model for a feather progenitor. The so-called feathered dinosaurs, Protarchaeopteryx and Caudipteryx are flightless birds. |
More from the synopsis:
The oldest known feathers are modern even to the level of microscopic detail, and all the basic features of feathers must have been in place before a basic dichotomy into Sauriurae and the Ornithurae occured. |
Jerome:
Once again this is on my side of the argument. |
I'm sorry, but was your argument not that the impressions of feathers on archaeopteryx (dino-birds) and dinosaurs could have been faked, so we should not regard them as facts? Moving goal posts is not cool…
From the Symposium Evolutionary Origin of Feathers presented at the Annual Metting of the Society for Integrative and Comparative Biology, 6–10 January 1999, at Denver, Colorado |
Dates matter Jerome. Impressions of feathers have since been found with dinosaur fossils. Dude made his point about archaeopteryx with that review.
Anyhow, you have already been given links to later finds. This one from 2003 for example:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Microraptor
Edited
|
Uncertainty may make you uncomfortable. Certainty makes you ridiculous.
Why not question something for a change?
Genetic Literacy Project |
|
|
|
Dude
SFN Die Hard
USA
6891 Posts |
Posted - 06/22/2007 : 15:59:45 [Permalink]
|
| The oldest known feathers are modern even to the level of microscopic detail, and all the basic features of feathers must have been in place before a basic dichotomy into Sauriurae and the Ornithurae occured. |
I get the distinct impression that Jerome doesn't understand what this means.
Jerome, that sentence is saying that feathers are older than birds! How could it possibly support your idiotic contention that the fossil feathers on archaeopteryx are faked?
Just admit that you have been show to be wrong, decisively, and that the feather fossils aren't faked.
|
Ignorance is preferable to error; and he is less remote from the truth who believes nothing, than he who believes what is wrong.
-- Thomas Jefferson
"god :: the last refuge of a man with no answers and no argument." - G. Carlin
Hope, n.
The handmaiden of desperation; the opiate of despair; the illegible signpost on the road to perdition. ~~ da filth |
|
|
|
|
Kil
Evil Skeptic
USA
13481 Posts |
 Posted - 06/22/2007 : 16:11:36 [Permalink]
|
Jerome:
Seems the need for a transitioning feather has not been met. This was not even my initial point. |
Oh my, look! Jerome may have found a gap in the fossil record. What shall we do!!!!!
Transitional from dinosaurs to birds just doesn't cut it for Jerome. He wants the complete fossil record of animals living over 100 million years ago, including one of the rarest of all finds, feather impressions. Darn…
We may be screwed on this one.
 |
Uncertainty may make you uncomfortable. Certainty makes you ridiculous.
Why not question something for a change?
Genetic Literacy Project |
|
|
|
Ricky
SFN Die Hard
USA
4907 Posts |
|
|
JEROME DA GNOME
BANNED
2418 Posts |
Posted - 06/22/2007 : 20:01:31 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by Ricky
Seems the need for a transitioning feather has not been met. This was not even my initial point. |
Next thing you know, Jerome will be stating that bacteria didn't develop resistance to antibiotics, that those were always ther... nope, he's already done that. Next thing you know, he'll be stating that because there have been fraudulent fossils in science in the past, it should discredit evidence in the presen... nope, he's done that too. How about mistake evolution for discrete large changes? Ah shit, he's done that as well.
You sure you don't read Creationist literature, Jerome?
|
Do you assume every one you interact with is deceiving you and has ulterior motives. If so, that is a sad life to life.
|
What a man believes upon grossly insufficient evidence is an index into his desires -- desires of which he himself is often unconscious. If a man is offered a fact which goes against his instincts, he will scrutinize it closely, and unless the evidence is overwhelming, he will refuse to believe it. If, on the other hand, he is offered something which affords a reason for acting in accordance to his instincts, he will accept it even on the slightest evidence. The origin of myths is explained in this way. - Bertrand Russell |
|
|
|
Kil
Evil Skeptic
USA
13481 Posts |
 Posted - 06/22/2007 : 20:49:23 [Permalink]
|
Jerome:
Do you assume every one you interact with is deceiving you and has ulterior motives. If so, that is a sad life to life. |
Actually, a quick look over the threads you have started, and the arguments in threads you haven't started, and I would say you have described yourself to a T, with one big difference. In your case, it's everyone you haven't interacted with that is deceiving you and has ulterior motives, which is almost everyone on the planet.
 |
Uncertainty may make you uncomfortable. Certainty makes you ridiculous.
Why not question something for a change?
Genetic Literacy Project |
|
|
|
JEROME DA GNOME
BANNED
2418 Posts |
Posted - 06/22/2007 : 21:16:33 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by Kil
Jerome:
Do you assume every one you interact with is deceiving you and has ulterior motives. If so, that is a sad life to life. |
Actually, a quick look over the threads you have started, and the arguments in threads you haven't started, and I would say you have described yourself to a T, with one big difference. In your case, it's everyone you haven't interacted with that is deceiving you and has ulterior motives, which is almost everyone on the planet.
|
I take most things at face value. It is when things do not add up and with research are proven false I see the deception.
|
What a man believes upon grossly insufficient evidence is an index into his desires -- desires of which he himself is often unconscious. If a man is offered a fact which goes against his instincts, he will scrutinize it closely, and unless the evidence is overwhelming, he will refuse to believe it. If, on the other hand, he is offered something which affords a reason for acting in accordance to his instincts, he will accept it even on the slightest evidence. The origin of myths is explained in this way. - Bertrand Russell |
|
|
|
Kil
Evil Skeptic
USA
13481 Posts |
Posted - 06/22/2007 : 22:06:08 [Permalink]
|
| Featherd dinasours don't add up? |
Uncertainty may make you uncomfortable. Certainty makes you ridiculous.
Why not question something for a change?
Genetic Literacy Project |
|
|
|
JEROME DA GNOME
BANNED
2418 Posts |
Posted - 06/22/2007 : 22:15:24 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by Kil
Featherd dinasours don't add up?
|
The presentation of the feathered dino in the OP did not add up. The artists pictures were much different than the evidence found(no feathers).
|
What a man believes upon grossly insufficient evidence is an index into his desires -- desires of which he himself is often unconscious. If a man is offered a fact which goes against his instincts, he will scrutinize it closely, and unless the evidence is overwhelming, he will refuse to believe it. If, on the other hand, he is offered something which affords a reason for acting in accordance to his instincts, he will accept it even on the slightest evidence. The origin of myths is explained in this way. - Bertrand Russell |
|
|
|
Dave W.
Info Junkie
USA
26031 Posts |
Posted - 06/22/2007 : 22:23:58 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by JEROME DA GNOME
I take most things at face value. |
No, you don't. You think a photo of a fossil is good enough for you to make pronouncements about the fossil itself. How can you take something at face value when you haven't looked at its face?| It is when things do not add up... |
What, precisely, has not added up?| ...and with research are proven false I see the deception. |
Wow, what research on feathered dinosaurs has been "proven false?"
Or is this another "Pitdown was proof of theory for 41 years" kind of statements, that'll take a dozen posts and 45 minutes in chat before you'll admit that you were wrong to say it?
And of course, while you did admit that was wrong in chat, you haven't come back here and retracted that statement, now have you? |
- Dave W. (Private Msg, EMail)
Evidently, I rock!
Why not question something for a change?
Visit Dave's Psoriasis Info, too. |
|
|
|
JEROME DA GNOME
BANNED
2418 Posts |
Posted - 06/22/2007 : 22:28:38 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by Dave W.
Originally posted by JEROME DA GNOME
I take most things at face value. |
No, you don't. You think a photo of a fossil is good enough for you to make pronouncements about the fossil itself. How can you take something at face value when you haven't looked at its face?| It is when things do not add up... |
What, precisely, has not added up?| ...and with research are proven false I see the deception. |
Wow, what research on feathered dinosaurs has been "proven false?"
Or is this another "Pitdown was proof of theory for 41 years" kind of statements, that'll take a dozen posts and 45 minutes in chat before you'll admit that you were wrong to say it?
And of course, while you did admit that was wrong in chat, you haven't come back here and retracted that statement, now have you?
|
Try reading the post just above yours. Maybe you should read before responding.
I did retract that statement, try reading before you post.
|
What a man believes upon grossly insufficient evidence is an index into his desires -- desires of which he himself is often unconscious. If a man is offered a fact which goes against his instincts, he will scrutinize it closely, and unless the evidence is overwhelming, he will refuse to believe it. If, on the other hand, he is offered something which affords a reason for acting in accordance to his instincts, he will accept it even on the slightest evidence. The origin of myths is explained in this way. - Bertrand Russell |
|
|
|
Dave W.
Info Junkie
USA
26031 Posts |
Posted - 06/22/2007 : 22:43:40 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by JEROME DA GNOME
Try reading the post just above yours. Maybe you should read before responding. |
Maybe you should realize that sometimes someone can be typing up a post while someone else sticks in a two-liner. I'm sure you'd prefer to assume that I wasn't reading, but it's not the case.| I did retract that statement, try reading before you post. |
I'll go back and read again... Nope, still no posts from you disavowing your statement that Piltdown was proof of something. |
- Dave W. (Private Msg, EMail)
Evidently, I rock!
Why not question something for a change?
Visit Dave's Psoriasis Info, too. |
|
|
|
Kil
Evil Skeptic
USA
13481 Posts |
Posted - 06/22/2007 : 22:55:48 [Permalink]
|
| He retracted it here more or less. |
Uncertainty may make you uncomfortable. Certainty makes you ridiculous.
Why not question something for a change?
Genetic Literacy Project |
|
|
|
Dave W.
Info Junkie
USA
26031 Posts |
Posted - 06/22/2007 : 23:05:50 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by Kil
He retracted it here.
|
Oh, he's claiming that the "foundation" and "proof" of a theory are the same thing? How utterly bizarre.
Well, if anything it just makes it more clear that Jerome wouldn't know science if it bit him in his hypothesis. |
- Dave W. (Private Msg, EMail)
Evidently, I rock!
Why not question something for a change?
Visit Dave's Psoriasis Info, too. |
|
|
 |
|
|
|
Xing Xu, Big Bird and the Six Day Shuffle
