Become a part of one of the fastest growing adult communities online. We have something for you, whether you’re a male member seeking out new friends or a new lady on the scene looking to take advantage of our many opportunities to network, make new friends, or connect with people. Join today & take part in lively discussions, take advantage of all the great features that attract hundreds of new daily members!
The Sandbox - NationalThe Sandbox is a collection of off-topic discussions. Humorous threads, Sports talk, and a wide variety of other topics can be found here.
Creatures that existed (If you can believe the dating methods
used by evolutionist) from millions of years ago, that still exist
today, in a relatively unchanged state from what the oldest
fossils show them to be.
And absolutely no transitional fossils showing creatures changing
from one kind to another.
So who is the gullible one?
Stephen Jay Gould noted evolutionary scientist said
--The fossil record with it's abrupt transitions offers
no support for gradual change.
So we are suppose to discount the fossil record as unreliable,
in favor of their supposed theory of evolution.
I'll bet you always did what teacher said.
More creationist bullshit.
What do you mean "If you can believe the dating methods used by evolutionists?"
Radioactive dating methods are not used just by evolutionists, but by ALL scientists. And it is pretty much the ONLY accepted dating method. Here is a Wiki description:
---------------------------------------- "Radiometric dating (often called radioactive dating) is a technique used to date materials such as rocks, usually based on a comparison between the observed abundance of a naturally occurring radioactive isotope and its decay products, using known decay rates. The use of radiometric dating was first published in 1907 by Bertram Boltwood and is now the principal source of information about the absolute age of rocks and other geological features, including the age of the Earth itself, and can be used to date a wide range of natural and man-made materials. Together with stratigraphic principles, radiometric dating methods are used in geochronology to establish the geological time scale. Among the best-known techniques are radiocarbon dating, potassium-argon dating and uranium-lead dating. By allowing the establishment of geological timescales, it provides a significant source of information about the ages of fossils and the deduced rates of evolutionary change. Radiometric dating is also used to date archaeological materials, including ancient artifacts.
---------------------------------------
So there you have the standard that SCIENCE relies on.
Now you tell me, what method of artifact dating is used by creationists? None whatsoever, right? You just make dates up to fit your biblical story bullshit, right?
The rock formation was said to be two billion years old. Therefore, the alleged "footprint" had to have been made by a giant that lived before life began on earth. OR, it was carved by humans.
Only a gullible creationist would ignore the obvious explanation and choose to believe in ancient giants.
There's a maximum height humans can achieve due to the limitations of physics upon our bodies such as constraints like your heart having to work much harder to pump blood and the amount of stress your bones can support due to gravity. There's a reason why the largest animals in the world live in the sea and not on land - the stress of gravity on the body limits how large one can grow, much less while maintaining a bipedal shape.
The tallest recorded human was Robert Wadlow, who while extremely tall at 8'11.1", was still hardly large enough to create the "footprint" in the video.
So, in short, I believe that "giant's footprint" to not have been created by a giant human.
What do you mean "If you can believe the dating methods used by evolutionists?"
Radioactive dating methods are not used just by evolutionists, but by ALL scientists. And it is pretty much the ONLY accepted dating method. Here is a Wiki description:
---------------------------------------- "Radiometric dating (often called radioactive dating) is a technique used to date materials such as rocks, usually based on a comparison between the observed abundance of a naturally occurring radioactive isotope and its decay products, using known decay rates. The use of radiometric dating was first published in 1907 by Bertram Boltwood and is now the principal source of information about the absolute age of rocks and other geological features, including the age of the Earth itself, and can be used to date a wide range of natural and man-made materials. Together with stratigraphic principles, radiometric dating methods are used in geochronology to establish the geological time scale. Among the best-known techniques are radiocarbon dating, potassium-argon dating and uranium-lead dating. By allowing the establishment of geological timescales, it provides a significant source of information about the ages of fossils and the deduced rates of evolutionary change. Radiometric dating is also used to date archaeological materials, including ancient artifacts.
---------------------------------------
So there you have the standard that SCIENCE relies on.
Now you tell me, what method of artifact dating is used by creationists? None whatsoever, right? You just make dates up to fit your biblical story bullshit, right?
The rock formation was said to be two billion years old. Therefore, the alleged "footprint" had to have been made by a giant that lived before life began on earth. OR, it was carved by humans.
Only a gullible creationist would ignore the obvious explanation and choose to believe in ancient giants.
Lol this coming from a dumb ass lie you Ex-Nyer who finds it far fetched that UFO's and/or aliens exist. Even though it's a known fact that billions of galaxies exist and infinite amount of stars exist- yet only little ole earth has intelligent life?
E-Nyer I am going to assume you don't believe in Bigfoot? Yet you have no problem believing in the neantherdal(sp) men and cavemen that were one step removed from apes?
You are the same moron that believes thousands of years ago ancient men were able to create huge monuments and buildings that if were replicated in 2013 would require massive heavy equipment and some of the best engineers - yet you think they were created with simple slave labor and the simplest tools?
By the way Ex-Nyer a few weeks was watching a show in National Geographic and the bullshit talking narrator said that nearly 1/2 million years ago- penguins gave up their ability to fly- are you fucking kidding me? It would be to a penguins advantage if it could fly- their are seals, whales, and plor bears that eat Penguins- if they could fly penguins wouldn't be eaten by whales, polar bears are seals. Here's a lin showing why the evolution theory that penguins once could fly is bullshit: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencete...xcel-both.html
The penguin was designed to swim - point blank!!!!
Lol this coming from a dumb ass lie you Ex-Nyer who finds it far fetched that UFO's and/or aliens exist. Even though it's a known fact that billions of galaxies exist and infinite amount of stars exist- yet only little ole earth has intelligent life?
Where did I say that? WHERE? I have never said that only earth has intelligent life, you lying, knuckle-dragging Bible thumper. I only said that no Aliens have visited earth from other planets becuase of the distances and time involved. Learn to read.
E-Nyer I am going to assume you don't believe in Bigfoot? Yet you have no problem believing in the neantherdal(sp) men and cavemen that were one step removed from apes?
How did Bigfoot get in the conversation, you idiot? The video is not about "Bigfoot". It is about a 'big foot print". And Bigfoot is a legendary creature that supposedly lives NOW or in the recent past in North America. But the foot print is in South Africa and is over 2 billions old. So, again, why did you bring up "Bigfoot"? Because your simple mind was confused by the sight of a big foot?
Also, it is easy to beleive in Neanderthals, since we have fossil proof of their existence. On the other hand, there is NO scientifically accepted proof of any Bigfoot type creature in North America.
You are the same moron that believes thousands of years ago ancient men were able to create huge monuments and buildings that if were replicated in 2013 would require massive heavy equipment and some of the best engineers - yet you think they were created with simple slave labor and the simplest tools?
You are repeating lies that have been disproved in about a dozen other threads in this forum. You have been pointed to a dozen different websites that explained in simple concrete terms how the pyramids could have been built, how the Easter Island statues were made, and how that other thing in South America was made. And yet, you repeat the creationist lies like you never read any of those websites you were pointed to. Becuase you are nothing more than a propagandist for Scriptural fantasies.
By the way Ex-Nyer a few weeks was watching a show in National Geographic and the bullshit talking narrator said that nearly 1/2 million years ago- penguins gave up their ability to fly- are you fucking kidding me? It would be to a penguins advantage if it could fly- their are seals, whales, and plor bears that eat Penguins- if they could fly penguins wouldn't be eaten by whales, polar bears are seals. Here's a lin showing why the evolution theory that penguins once could fly is bullshit: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencete...xcel-both.html
The penguin was designed to swim - point blank!!!!
Stop talking about evolution you knuckle dragging Bible-based moron. You are way out of your league.
It may or may not have been to a penguins advantage to fly. However, it definitely was MORE advantageous for it to be able to swim. It was able to get more food from the ocean that way. You continually disregard the comparative advantage that swimming gives the penguin. It may not be able to fly away from polar bears, but it can out swim them. So, it doesn't need to fly. Ever thing of it that way?
Originally Posted by wellendowed1911 View Post
Lol this coming from a dumb ass lie you Ex-Nyer who finds it far fetched that UFO's and/or aliens exist. Even though it's a known fact that billions of galaxies exist and infinite amount of stars exist- yet only little ole earth has intelligent life?
Where did I say that? WHERE? I have never said that only earth has intelligent life, you lying, knuckle-dragging Bible thumper. I only said that no Aliens have visited earth from other planets becuase of the distances and time involved. Learn to read.
So I guess even though you NOW admit there could be intelligent life- somehow you think in this huge vast galaxy that their aren't beings who are intellectually superior to mankind and have more advanced technology than humans? How do you know there isn't species in this universe or another that has mastered how to defy gravity or travel faster than light or time travel? So mankind can travel to the moon and space yet you think there's no beings in this galaxy or another that can travel to different planets? 500 years ago anyone would have laughed at the fact of man traveling faster than speed of sound- do you think the Wright brothers would ever believe their would be aircraft than traveled faster than sound- go ahead and google Sr-71 blackbird that was built in the 60's- over 40 years ago and it traveled far faster than the speed of sound- now imagine what man can do 40 years later- now multiply that by would a superior more advanced race could do.
E-Nyer I am going to assume you don't believe in Bigfoot? Yet you have no problem believing in the neantherdal(sp) men and cavemen that were one step removed from apes?
How did Bigfoot get in the conversation, you idiot? The video is not about "Bigfoot". It is about a 'big foot print". And Bigfoot is a legendary creature that supposedly lives NOW or in the recent past in North America. But the foot print is in South Africa and is over 2 billions old. So, again, why did you bring up "Bigfoot"? Because your simple mind was confused by the sight of a big foot?
BigFoot is in the convo because you believe the shit is made up as do most evolutionist- by base on the theory of evolution wouldn't it be very possble that this type of creature could have existed or exist since most people describe as a cross between a giant ape and a man?
Also, it is easy to beleive in Neanderthals, since we have fossil proof of their existence. On the other hand, there is NO scientifically accepted proof of any Bigfoot type creature in North America.
I beg to differ- prove to me that it doesn't exist- why because you never seen one? That's the dumbest copt out ever- prove to me Oxygen exist- hell have you seen Oxygen before- fuck no- but it exist right- your problem is- you need to physically see something to believe it exist. Heck prove to me there are 9 or more planets-how do I know that every phot NASA has shown hasn't been photoshopped or staged? Heck you got people who believe we never went to the moon and trust me I have seen skeptics pull off a re-enactment and it looked identical to the "real thing"- so your idea that oh UFO's never landed on the White house lawn- doesn't prove or disprove jack-shit- because meteors have never landed on the White house lawn or in the middle of time square yet we know they exist.
You are the same moron that believes thousands of years ago ancient men were able to create huge monuments and buildings that if were replicated in 2013 would require massive heavy equipment and some of the best engineers - yet you think they were created with simple slave labor and the simplest tools?
You are repeating lies that have been disproved in about a dozen other threads in this forum. You have been pointed to a dozen different websites that explained in simple concrete terms how the pyramids could have been built, how the Easter Island statues were made, and how that other thing in South America was made. And yet, you repeat the creationist lies like you never read any of those websites you were pointed to. Becuase you are nothing more than a propagandist for Scriptural fantasies.
You moron that was just a freaking theory- they have no clue or idea how they were moved- Hell I could get a thousand people to move a 5 ton boulder- but that doesn't mean that's the method they used- you need to look up the word "theory" versus the word "fact"- why isn't their any literature from the inhabitants that mentioned they moved it in that manner? Why do they mention other entities?
By the way Ex-Nyer a few weeks was watching a show in National Geographic and the bullshit talking narrator said that nearly 1/2 million years ago- penguins gave up their ability to fly- are you fucking kidding me? It would be to a penguins advantage if it could fly- their are seals, whales, and plor bears that eat Penguins- if they could fly penguins wouldn't be eaten by whales, polar bears are seals. Here's a lin showing why the evolution theory that penguins once could fly is bullshit: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencete...xcel-both.html
The penguin was designed to swim - point blank!!!!
Stop talking about evolution you knuckle dragging Bible-based moron. You are way out of your league.
It may or may not have been to a penguins advantage to fly. However, it definitely was MORE advantageous for it to be able to swim. It was able to get more food from the ocean that way. You continually disregard the comparative advantage that swimming gives the penguin. It may not be able to fly away from polar bears, but it can out swim them. So, it doesn't need to fly. Ever thing of it that way?
You don't now when to give up- watch a little national geographic- a penguins main enemies that prey on them are seals, polar bears and whales and dolphins too- dolphins whales and seals are better swimmers than penguins- so how could that be an advantage- penguins have to stay on land to obviously avoid being eaten by Whales, Dolphins, or seals- however, on land polar bears are a huge threat- however, if Penguins could FLY they would avoid danger from those 3. Oh and by the way- don't let looks fool you- a polar bear can out run a human and can swim and make Micheal phelps look like an idiot- Polar Bears are actually very good swimmers and have been filmed catching penguins and killing them in the water. Here's a link showing a Leopard seal having no problem catching and illing penguins- perhaps penguins need to re-consider and go back to flying: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ERihECTb81M
also, why don't we see any Super species if evolution was true. Take a Lion, Cheetah, and Leopard- they live in same area- hunt some of the same species- but each one has advantages and disadvantages. The lion is the strongest of the 3, but the slowest of the 3- Lion has a top speed of 30 miles per hour and can't catch faster prey- the leopard is the only one of the 3 that can climb trees with ease- in fact the leopards has ankles that curve in- unlike the other 2 and can hoist animals 3 times it's weight high up trees- the cheetah is the weakest of the 3- but the fastest and can outrun any other land animal and can chase down any other prey- why isn't a cat that has evolved that is strong- super speed, and mobile enough to climb trees? You know why?-because Evolution doesn't EXIST
Micro evolution is a fact, the ability for an organism to change to
some degree and adapt to it's environment.
Macro evolution, the transition from one creature to another is not,
and there is no evidence of any such transitional (missing link) fossils
found in the fossil record.
The fossil record shows only three things.
Creatures that once lived but have now become extinct.
Creatures that still can be found living, of which there are
examples that can be found of the same creatures in the
fossil record, with the creatures exhibiting little in the way
of change over long periods of time.
And absolutely no transitional (missing link) fossils,
of which there should be thousands if one is to point
to the fossil record as some kind of proof that the
Darwinian Model of evolution is true.
The fossil record simply does not back it up.
So you are left with having to discard what the
evidence of the fossil record shows if you are
going to accept Darwinism.
Stephen Jay Gould (one of the most highly regarded
Darwinian Evolutionist) himself said that the fossil
record shows no evidence of the transitional change
of creatures over long periods of time. Stephen Jay Gould
wasn't willing to give up the theory though, because he
didn't believe there was a God, and he could find no
better explanation for existence than the Darwinian Model,
even though the evidence is against it.
Oh, and yes, enough of the fossil record has been discovered
that if the evidence was there it should be apparent.
But, but, but most of the scientist think that evolution
is the true explanation for existence, big woopedy,
a few hundred years ago most of the scientist thought
the earth was flat as well.
Originally Posted by wellendowed1911 View Post
Lol this coming from a dumb ass lie you Ex-Nyer who finds it far fetched that UFO's and/or aliens exist. Even though it's a known fact that billions of galaxies exist and infinite amount of stars exist- yet only little ole earth has intelligent life?
Where did I say that? WHERE? I have never said that only earth has intelligent life, you lying, knuckle-dragging Bible thumper. I only said that no Aliens have visited earth from other planets becuase of the distances and time involved. Learn to read.
So I guess even though you NOW admit there could be intelligent life- somehow you think in this huge vast galaxy that their aren't beings who are intellectually superior to mankind and have more advanced technology than humans? How do you know there isn't species in this universe or another that has mastered how to defy gravity or travel faster than light or time travel? So mankind can travel to the moon and space yet you think there's no beings in this galaxy or another that can travel to different planets? 500 years ago anyone would have laughed at the fact of man traveling faster than speed of sound- do you think the Wright brothers would ever believe their would be aircraft than traveled faster than sound- go ahead and google Sr-71 blackbird that was built in the 60's- over 40 years ago and it traveled far faster than the speed of sound- now imagine what man can do 40 years later- now multiply that by would a superior more advanced race could do.
E-Nyer I am going to assume you don't believe in Bigfoot? Yet you have no problem believing in the neantherdal(sp) men and cavemen that were one step removed from apes?
How did Bigfoot get in the conversation, you idiot? The video is not about "Bigfoot". It is about a 'big foot print". And Bigfoot is a legendary creature that supposedly lives NOW or in the recent past in North America. But the foot print is in South Africa and is over 2 billions old. So, again, why did you bring up "Bigfoot"? Because your simple mind was confused by the sight of a big foot?
BigFoot is in the convo because you believe the shit is made up as do most evolutionist- by base on the theory of evolution wouldn't it be very possble that this type of creature could have existed or exist since most people describe as a cross between a giant ape and a man?
Also, it is easy to beleive in Neanderthals, since we have fossil proof of their existence. On the other hand, there is NO scientifically accepted proof of any Bigfoot type creature in North America.
I beg to differ- prove to me that it doesn't exist- why because you never seen one? That's the dumbest copt out ever- prove to me Oxygen exist- hell have you seen Oxygen before- fuck no- but it exist right- your problem is- you need to physically see something to believe it exist. Heck prove to me there are 9 or more planets-how do I know that every phot NASA has shown hasn't been photoshopped or staged? Heck you got people who believe we never went to the moon and trust me I have seen skeptics pull off a re-enactment and it looked identical to the "real thing"- so your idea that oh UFO's never landed on the White house lawn- doesn't prove or disprove jack-shit- because meteors have never landed on the White house lawn or in the middle of time square yet we know they exist.
You are the same moron that believes thousands of years ago ancient men were able to create huge monuments and buildings that if were replicated in 2013 would require massive heavy equipment and some of the best engineers - yet you think they were created with simple slave labor and the simplest tools?
You are repeating lies that have been disproved in about a dozen other threads in this forum. You have been pointed to a dozen different websites that explained in simple concrete terms how the pyramids could have been built, how the Easter Island statues were made, and how that other thing in South America was made. And yet, you repeat the creationist lies like you never read any of those websites you were pointed to. Becuase you are nothing more than a propagandist for Scriptural fantasies.
You moron that was just a freaking theory- they have no clue or idea how they were moved- Hell I could get a thousand people to move a 5 ton boulder- but that doesn't mean that's the method they used- you need to look up the word "theory" versus the word "fact"- why isn't their any literature from the inhabitants that mentioned they moved it in that manner? Why do they mention other entities?
By the way Ex-Nyer a few weeks was watching a show in National Geographic and the bullshit talking narrator said that nearly 1/2 million years ago- penguins gave up their ability to fly- are you fucking kidding me? It would be to a penguins advantage if it could fly- their are seals, whales, and plor bears that eat Penguins- if they could fly penguins wouldn't be eaten by whales, polar bears are seals. Here's a lin showing why the evolution theory that penguins once could fly is bullshit: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencete...xcel-both.html
The penguin was designed to swim - point blank!!!!
Stop talking about evolution you knuckle dragging Bible-based moron. You are way out of your league.
It may or may not have been to a penguins advantage to fly. However, it definitely was MORE advantageous for it to be able to swim. It was able to get more food from the ocean that way. You continually disregard the comparative advantage that swimming gives the penguin. It may not be able to fly away from polar bears, but it can out swim them. So, it doesn't need to fly. Ever thing of it that way?
You don't now when to give up- watch a little national geographic- a penguins main enemies that prey on them are seals, polar bears and whales and dolphins too- dolphins whales and seals are better swimmers than penguins- so how could that be an advantage- penguins have to stay on land to obviously avoid being eaten by Whales, Dolphins, or seals- however, on land polar bears are a huge threat- however, if Penguins could FLY they would avoid danger from those 3. Oh and by the way- don't let looks fool you- a polar bear can out run a human and can swim and make Micheal phelps look like an idiot- Polar Bears are actually very good swimmers and have been filmed catching penguins and killing them in the water. Here's a link showing a Leopard seal having no problem catching and illing penguins- perhaps penguins need to re-consider and go back to flying: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ERihECTb81M
also, why don't we see any Super species if evolution was true. Take a Lion, Cheetah, and Leopard- they live in same area- hunt some of the same species- but each one has advantages and disadvantages. The lion is the strongest of the 3, but the slowest of the 3- Lion has a top speed of 30 miles per hour and can't catch faster prey- the leopard is the only one of the 3 that can climb trees with ease- in fact the leopards has ankles that curve in- unlike the other 2 and can hoist animals 3 times it's weight high up trees- the cheetah is the weakest of the 3- but the fastest and can outrun any other land animal and can chase down any other prey- why isn't a cat that has evolved that is strong- super speed, and mobile enough to climb trees? You know why?-because Evolution doesn't EXIST
You are an idiot. You always have been an idiot. You always will be an idiot
And I'm sure you will have idiot kids.
EVERYTHING you posted about has been proven wrong to you in past threads.
And you still re-post your idiot Scriptural fantasies.
And you STILL misquote me when you say that only NOW do I believe in intelligent life elsewhere in the universe.
I NEVER said that and you know it.
All I ever said was that intelligent life had no way of finding us or getting to us in a period of time that was less than centuries long - even traveling at the speed of light.
Therefore, I did not believe in UFOs. But, because you are a semi-literate Bible thumper, you continually misconstrue that to mean that I did not believe there was intelligent life elsewhere.
Micro evolution is a fact, the ability for an organism to change to some degree and adapt to it's environment.
Macro evolution, the transition from one creature to another is not, and there is no evidence of any such transitional (missing link) fossils found in the fossil record.
The fossil record shows only three things. Really? Only 3 things? Do you have proof of this? Or is this just something you Baptists repeat to each other to make yourselves believe it?
Creatures that once lived but have now become extinct.
Creatures that still can be found living, of which there are examples that can be found of the same creatures in the fossil record, with the creatures exhibiting little in the way
of change over long periods of time.
And absolutely no transitional (missing link) fossils, of which there should be thousands if one is to point to the fossil record as some kind of proof that the
Darwinian Model of evolution is true.
Link? Do you have proof of this? Or is this just something you Baptists repeat to each other to make yourselves believe it?
The fossil record simply does not back it up. Link? Do you have proof of this? Or is this just something you Baptists repeat to each other to make yourselves believe it?
So you are left with having to discard what the evidence of the fossil record shows if you are going to accept Darwinism. No, the fossil record supports evolution. It just doesn't support the Bible, which is why you hate the fossil record.
Stephen Jay Gould (one of the most highly regarded Darwinian Evolutionist) himself said that the fossil record shows no evidence of the transitional change of creatures over long periods of time. Stephen Jay Gould wasn't willing to give up the theory though, because he didn't believe there was a God, and he could find no better explanation for existence than the Darwinian Model, even though the evidence is against it.
Oh, and yes, enough of the fossil record has been discovered that if the evidence was there it should be apparent.
But, but, but most of the scientist think that evolution is the true explanation for existence, big woopedy, a few hundred years ago most of the scientist thought the earth was flat as well.
Yeah, by all means, let's not believe in that FACT-based evolution stuff.
Let's just believe in the invisible man in the clouds stuff.
