It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
originally posted by: firefromabove
How is it that evolutionist "scientists" look at a single jawbone or a thigh bone of some extinct animal and then somehow just "know" what the rest of the animal looked like?
Most images we have of extinct animals are artist renderings, based on one jawbone or thighbone!
Anybody can see that evolutionists operate not on evidence but on imagination and assumptions. If you feel otherwise please explain.
originally posted by: firefromabove
originally posted by: Vector99
originally posted by: firefromabove
a reply to: 3NL1GHT3N3D1
I'm not sure how people drawing extinct animals disproves evolution
That's not what I said
How can a single jawbone be the basis for an understanding of what the creature may have looked like
Evolutionists just magically know everything, don't they.
So you don't understand evolution or scientific methods....therefore it's all lies and rubbish?
I fully understand evolution. The problem is that its theoretical and doesn't have much going for it in the "solid evidence" department
Its guesswork resting on assumptions resting on conjecture
originally posted by: firefromabove
originally posted by: TzarChasm
yet another catchy thread wherein someone tries to make the theory of modern evolutionary synthesis look stupid and ends up proving that they dont have the educational background in geology, biology, paleontology, anthropology, chemistry, etc to adequately criticize evolution. who saw that coming?
*tips fedora
Le science will save us from le magical sky fairy
originally posted by: Phantom423
originally posted by: firefromabove
originally posted by: TzarChasm
yet another catchy thread wherein someone tries to make the theory of modern evolutionary synthesis look stupid and ends up proving that they dont have the educational background in geology, biology, paleontology, anthropology, chemistry, etc to adequately criticize evolution. who saw that coming?
*tips fedora
Le science will save us from le magical sky fairy
Sorry, you're a lost cause, even to science. BTW, as a Muslim, why do you even care about evolution? Don't you have other "priorities" today?
originally posted by: JoshuaCox
a reply to: ReyaPhemhurth
I'm not a Christian .. I'm as atheist as they come.
I grew up southern baptist (aka the most Christian of all Christians lol)..
But the logical fallacy thing , espeacially on the correct side of the argument drives me nuts ..
The correct side doesn't need them..
I think we only " win" by policing ourselves..
Where would the opposition think tanks go if the exact same people who started BLM , in the same place, with the exact same sequence of events had instead chosen ;
"All lives matter " as their headline and focused on the issue as a whole rather than only the portion as it effects to black people??????
"This is an institutional problem that effects everyone's children , but effects African Americans at twice the rate per capita..."
Isn't sexy enough???
It is some how more marketable to only sell it as a problem that effects 13% of the population??
As a white supremacist and Holocaust denier, don't you have other "priorities"? You sound like a nasty racist. I don't speak to nasty racists. Bye.
originally posted by: firefromabove
originally posted by: Phantom423
originally posted by: firefromabove
originally posted by: TzarChasm
yet another catchy thread wherein someone tries to make the theory of modern evolutionary synthesis look stupid and ends up proving that they dont have the educational background in geology, biology, paleontology, anthropology, chemistry, etc to adequately criticize evolution. who saw that coming?
*tips fedora
Le science will save us from le magical sky fairy
Sorry, you're a lost cause, even to science. BTW, as a Muslim, why do you even care about evolution? Don't you have other "priorities" today?
As a white supremacist and Holocaust denier, don't you have other "priorities"?
You sound like a nasty racist.
I don't speak to nasty racists. Bye.
originally posted by: Phantom423
a reply to: firefromabove
As a white supremacist and Holocaust denier, don't you have other "priorities"? You sound like a nasty racist. I don't speak to nasty racists. Bye.
Well that got your attention, didn't it? As a matter of fact, I'm a Jew.
originally posted by: dragonridr
originally posted by: Phantom423
a reply to: firefromabove
As a white supremacist and Holocaust denier, don't you have other "priorities"? You sound like a nasty racist. I don't speak to nasty racists. Bye.
Well that got your attention, didn't it? As a matter of fact, I'm a Jew.
So your a Jewish white supremacist holocaust denier?? I'm so confused as to the relavance of you being jewish but yet didn't deny the rest. Very strange
originally posted by: dragonridr
originally posted by: Phantom423
a reply to: firefromabove
As a white supremacist and Holocaust denier, don't you have other "priorities"? You sound like a nasty racist. I don't speak to nasty racists. Bye.
Well that got your attention, didn't it? As a matter of fact, I'm a Jew.
So your a Jewish white supremacist holocaust denier?? I'm so confused as to the relavance of you being jewish but yet didn't deny the rest. Very strange
originally posted by: JoshuaCox
a reply to: ReyaPhemhurth
No one ever starts an atheist and the scientific evidence leads to Christianity...
originally posted by: Krazysh0t
originally posted by: JoshuaCox
a reply to: ReyaPhemhurth
No one ever starts an atheist and the scientific evidence leads to Christianity...
This statement is contradictory. If no one ever starts as an atheist then that means they started religious and were led to atheism.
originally posted by: firefromabove
a reply to: Phantom423
In that case, shalom aleichem
But still....