Tuesday, May 19, 2009

Ida: the Missing Link at Last?~

Darwinus Masillae: Ida

Mere hype or truly an evolutionary link?
See A.I.G.s article for a balanced look at the facts.
Posted by at
Labels: , ,

4 comments:

  1. AnonymousMay 19, 2009 at 8:15 PM

    evolutionary link... sorry.

    She is even thicker than the page and a half of myth you insist on being literally true.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Mark IIMay 19, 2009 at 11:02 PM

    Well, I'm not claiming that this fossil is an evolutionary link. Did you read the article that is linked here? To call Darwinus Masillae an evolutionary link is quite presumptuous. It would take substantial evidence to show that Ida isn't just another species. To claim a fossil as a missing link in an evolutionary cycle it would take multiple fossils that show variations between any given two species...not variation within species. There is a great difference between macro evolution and micro evolution.

    ReplyDelete
  3. AnonymousMay 20, 2009 at 10:36 AM

    It is all rigorous total denial, it's A.I.G.

    It's creationist lies and talking points. I have no respect for it and it looks bad on you trying to pass it off to other people. It's dishonesty.

    Have your faith, share it, go all over this world an minister but adding in outright lies and denialism into your faith? What does that make your faith become?

    I'm not gonna take any science lessons from AIG. Nobody should be forced to. They manage to combine stupid with deceitful.

    Even if Ida is not a direct ancestor (given her adolescence is just not probable) she is filling in our picture of the past. Something AIG does not do or want anyone else to do.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Mark IIMay 20, 2009 at 5:33 PM

    Alright Anonymous, I posted some comment rules last night. I have no problems if you comment but I ask that you follow the rules. If you follow the rules I think we can have some decent dialogue.

    Can you back up your propositions?

    Just because I post one article, by no means, does that I affirm all of A.I.G.'s work.

    You made this comment: "Have your faith, share it, go all over this world an[sic] minister..." and then in your first comment you rebuke me for sharing material from A.I.G. So, you tell me to share my faith and then rebuke me for sharing something? You think that Creationism is dishonesty, but this is a part of what I adhere to. So if I were to "share my faith" that would include Creationism. So either I'm going to share it or not.

    Please try to follow me, I'm assuming you affirm naturalistic humanistic materialism. But yet you say that Creationism is a lie. You're worldview can't account for any kind of origin of the space time universe. For "origins" is in the category of Philosophy not Science, by definition. Thus to make any kind of claim with as much certitude as you did about Creationism is more dishonest then those who do affirm.

    I'm going to ask you to substantiate your claims and not merely make vacuous proclamations.

    Also realize that I do not have all the time in the world to respond to comments so it may take time to respond. Thank you.

    ReplyDelete

Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)