It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
12How art thou fallen from heaven, O Lucifer, son of the morning! how art thou cut down to the ground, which didst weaken the nations! 13For thou hast said in thine heart, I will ascend into heaven, I will exalt my throne above the stars of God: I will sit also upon the mount of the congregation, in the sides of the north: 14I will ascend above the heights of the clouds; I will be like the most High. 15Yet thou shalt be brought down to hell, to the sides of the pit.
What you believe is Darwinism and that is theory at best. It is called theology.
Armitage acknowledges that he did that by keeping his views on the age of the fossil out of the paper. Written with biologist Kevin Lee Anderson of Arkansas State University-Beebe, the study simply reported that the horn was found in Hell Creek (which has a well-accepted age of 65 million to 70 million years). “It was just morphology,” says Mary Schweitzer, a palaeontologist at North Carolina State University at Raleigh who reviewed the work before publication, and made the first discovery of soft tissue in dinosaur bones in 2005. “It was fine.”
Further, your lack of knowledge also shows by equating Darwinism with theology. I am not sure by what you mean with Darwinism. Care to elaborate?
The ensuing legal issues are not caused by his publication. And this brings into view something else. If the evidence he found perfectly fits within the evolutionary theory, whence cometh your insistence that he had a peer reviewed scientific paper published with a young earth creationist slant?
whence cometh your insistence that he had a peer reviewed scientific paper published with a young earth creationist slant?
My lack of knowledge? Are you telling me that Darwinism is not theology and is scientific fact?
theology (n.) mid-14c., "the science of religion, study of God and his relationship to humanity," from Old French theologie "philosophical study of Christian doctrine; Scripture" (14c.), from Latin theologia, from Greek theologia "an account of the gods," from theologos "one discoursing on the gods," from theos "god" (from PIE root *dhes-, forming words for religious concepts) + -logos "treating of" (see -logy). Meaning "a particular system of theology" is from 1660s.
True science is that which is provable and demonstrable and theoretical presentations by scientists is not true science. Its simply a guess at best to keep the grants in pockets.
theory (n.) 1590s, "conception, mental scheme," from Late Latin theoria (Jerome), from Greek theoria "contemplation, speculation; a looking at, viewing; a sight, show, spectacle, things looked at," from theorein "to consider, speculate, look at," from theoros "spectator," from thea "a view" (see theater) + horan "to see," which is possibly from PIE root *wer- (3) "to perceive." Earlier in this sense was theorical (n.), late 15c. Sense of "principles or methods of a science or art" (rather than its practice) is first recorded 1610s (as in music theory, which is the science of musical composition, apart from practice or performance). Sense of "an intelligible explanation based on observation and reasoning" is from 1630s.
Show me that soft tissue can survive 68 million years
So now that Mr. Armitage has presented accepted fact that science is wrong,
originally posted by: Yvhmer
You claim: Soft tissue CANNOT EVER survive a 68 million year time-frame. On top a scientific theory can be wrong. To throw in all scientific disciplines in the "wrong" category, shows your real intent.
As I wrote in response to you regarding Mr Armitage, he was published because he left out his opinions on the age of the soft tissue. Do you understand what I just said in relation to you challenge: Show me that soft tissue can survive 68 million years Personally, I did not claim it. However. Your claim is that it's age is not 68 million years as you wrote:
Rebuttal of the Appeal to authority claim : Mr Armitage