Fascinating. I only study modern, domesticated paleontologists. I must admit to being fairly ignorant of their wild ancestors.Quaxar said:
Poll: Do you support evolution?
- Thread starter Matthew Jabour
- Start date
It only just occurred to me after reading this that my uncle, an archaeologist, is CONSTANTLY talking about how we should be at the pub with his paleontology/archaeology buddies. Its true. Its their natural congregation site. Their home. I know sincerely regret declining his offer and missing out on being allowed inside the pack.Quaxar said:
Truly they are an enigmatic and wondrous people.
They are quite a thing those wild ones, unfortunately though they are now pretty much extinct because they just couldn't keep up with the agressive brawling abilities of their more drunk competitors.BrassButtons said:
As you can see Paleopithecus was quite a bit hairier than most modern specimen of Homo excavatum, since with the advancements of digging techniques developed in pub gatherings more dirt would accumulate in their thick fur so losing hair turned out to be an advantage as it allowed them to go longer and deeper without needing a shower. And that of course meant more discoveries, which in turn secured bigger research grants for their group.
But it also meant less protection from the sun, thus beer also developed as a means of forgetting your various sunburns.
Damn, now I really want to submit a paper to Nature. But I'd probably get blacklisted for that...
Indeed. You could have studied them. Maybe even witnessed one of the seldom attempts of the two subspecies at cross-mating!BiscuitTrouser said:
I hear seeing a paleontologist trying to pass an Australopithecus thighbone off as one of a 14th century French monarch to attract female archeologists is quite a sight.
A print-out is essentially a publication and you and your colleagues are peers. Out of my dreams and into my CV!Dinwatr said:Speaking as a Homo excavatum, I approve the previous exchange.
ETA: And I may need to print it out to show some of my co-workers!
Would have preferred Nature but I take what I can.
In the notification the picture was original size... I just found out chocolate chip cookies bigger the size of a small frisbee are terrifying. Possibly delicious too but still a sight and most definitely the biggest internet cookies I've ever gotten.BrassButtons said:These are for you. You've earned them.Quaxar said:
I cannot back religion and creationism knowing what I know, versus their supposed tree of existence where everything existed at once and moved on since. Where dinosaurs lived with people, yet they are never found in the bible. I think a monstrous predator would make itself into the bible in some shape or form.
All I need to do is look at a creationist, ask if they have a pet dog, and if they say yes forward them to the documentary and man created dog. DID YALL KNOW A POINTER IS CALLED A POINTER CUZ IT POINTS AT STUFF, and a poodle is a retriever dog..... and corgis are smaller Sheppard dogs? GOLLY GEE.
All I need to do is look at a creationist, ask if they have a pet dog, and if they say yes forward them to the documentary and man created dog. DID YALL KNOW A POINTER IS CALLED A POINTER CUZ IT POINTS AT STUFF, and a poodle is a retriever dog..... and corgis are smaller Sheppard dogs? GOLLY GEE.
I fixed your post.Phrostbit3n said:
But seriously, why would there have to be a higher power? Why is the notion that there probably isn't one ridiculous? I dun geddit.
Everything has a beginning. There has to have been a point where itself didn't exist. And sense you can't make matter out of nothing by natural means, the origin of the universe must be supernatural.someonehairy-ish said:
So...the title we started with before we got pages of people bitching how inaccurate it was?Strazdas said:
This is the OP right now. This is what you people do to him.
This is kind of inaccurate, and regardless of if it was accurate you appear to be stating you have the answer based on a lack of evidence. Simply put that's illogical. Something unexplained like how the universe got here remains that, unexplained.Shadowstar38 said:
It's one of the most desperate attempts of biblical literalists. And very absurd and confusing sometime.Shadowstar38 said:
But don't listen to me, listen to creation "scientist" and last of the wolfmen Ken Ham:
<youtube=3qjHtyKq3yc>
Or go directly to the Creation Museum in Kentucky to witness it for yourself:
<youtube=YyGHsMeIjGs>
Also,
Vacuum energy is literally particles out of nothing.Shadowstar38 said:
EDIT: Matter can come from nothing.Shadowstar38 said:
Found this vid that discusses it http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zr70QJb2BUk
But even if that weren't the case, and the origin of the universe 'must' be supernatural, why assume that this supernatural cause has to be a particular god? Why not a collective of powerful beings, for example? Why assume that this god still exists? Why assume that it's aware of humans, cares about humans, that it even created the universe on purpose?
Even if you feel that there must be a supernatural origin to the universe, what causes you to leap from that to the conclusion that this same supernatural thing takes enough of an interest in life on Earth to guide evolution for a specific purpose?
Just a quick question...
Is there any conflict about evolution vs creation in any other country in the world kept for the USA? (i mean in this magnitude?)
Guess there was a reason why all those religious christian minorities left europe as soon as america was discovered Oo
Is there any conflict about evolution vs creation in any other country in the world kept for the USA? (i mean in this magnitude?)
Guess there was a reason why all those religious christian minorities left europe as soon as america was discovered Oo