Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Biological Taxonomy - Kinds vs. Species (Linnaean taxonomy)

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Originally posted by Alate_One View Post
    You could, I don't know, NOT be intentionally dense? If I say this and produce an image, it's pretty obvious what I'm referring to. It's not a rock, it's a fossil with sufficient preservation of the feathers to allow scientists to ascertain the creature's original coloration. So that means it's the partially preserved remains of a once living organism. And those remains should belong to some category or another.

    Was that organism a dinosaur or not? In your opinion.
    I do not assume that the rock (or rock-like thing) in your picture--or some portion thereof--is remains of any organism. Why should anybody think that it is? Because you, and lots of other people calling yourselves "Science" say that it is? Why do you think that it is?

    The chunk of material in your picture is no organism, and so, the chunk of material in your picture is not a dinosaur, nor a bird. And I do not even assume that the chunk of material in your picture--nor even a portion of it--is the remains of an organism, is the remains of a dinosaur, is the remains of a bird, is the remains of a cat, is the remains of a porcupine, etc. Why should I think that it is?

    Originally posted by Alate_One View Post
    I certainly have a position on the matter, but you're now the one that's refusing to answer.
    How is my saying, "No, the chunk of material in your picture is not an organism, and No, the chunk of material in your picture is not a dinosaur, and No, the chunk of material in your picture is not a bird," a refusal, on my part, to answer a question? And, what (if any) question are you saying I am refusing to answer?

    Originally posted by Alate_One View Post
    You said birds are non-dinosaurs.
    Yeah. So? I also said that no rock-like chunk of material, like what appears in your picture, is a dinosaur. Neither is it a bird. Did you know that some things can be BOTH non-dinosaur AND non-bird AND non-animal?

    Originally posted by Alate_One View Post
    Is the creature I posted a picture of earlier, a dinosaur or non-dinosaur?
    If by "creature", you mean "organism", again, I say that, so far as I can tell, you posted no picture of a creature. Why should I beg the question you're begging?

    Originally posted by Alate_One View Post
    It's the same question you keep insisting on others answering and now you won't answer it yourself.
    Wait...refresh my memory. I ask lots and lots of questions, no? To which (if any) of my questions are you referring, here, by your phase, "the same question..."?

    What's especially hilarious is that you, and others, think that the picture you posted displays the remains of A FISH!!!

    What evidence do you have to support your claim that what you call "evidence" is evidence?

    MAGA (Masking America's Gullible Apes)

    Comment


    • Originally posted by 7djengo7 View Post

      I do not assume that the rock (or rock-like thing) in your picture--or some portion thereof--is remains of any organism. Why should anybody think that it is? Because you, and lots of other people calling yourselves "Science" say that it is? Why do you think that it is?

      The chunk of material in your picture is no organism, and so, the chunk of material in your picture is not a dinosaur, nor a bird. And I do not even assume that the chunk of material in your picture--nor even a portion of it--is the remains of an organism, is the remains of a dinosaur, is the remains of a bird, is the remains of a cat, is the remains of a porcupine, etc. Why should I think that it is?
      Because if you crack open a rock and it has something in it that looks a bit like the bones of things walking around today, what else should I think it is?

      Are you one of those people that thinks Satan put fossils in the ground to confuse us?

      If you can't accept the evidence of objects in front of you I don't know how we can have a conversation since you don't even accept reality.
      “We do not believe in God because we need to explain this or that feature of the world. That is what science is for. We believe in God because we see something deeper in the world, something that transcends the scientific explanations.” - Karl Giberson Ph.D.



      - The science and faith of theistic evolution explained.

      Comment


      • Originally posted by Alate_One View Post

        Because if you crack open a rock and it has something in it that looks a bit like the bones of things walking around today, what else should I think it is?
        I've not cracked into a rock and found something that looks like bones.

        Now, the picture you posted--is it a photograph of something you claim to have found in the ground, or is it a photograph of something someone else claims to have found in the ground?

        Originally posted by Alate_One View Post
        Are you one of those people that thinks Satan put fossils in the ground to confuse us?
        No. I'm one of those people who think that Satan put Darwinists and other lying, Bible-despising irrationalists into his service to try to confuse people.

        Why should anybody believe that the provenance of something in a picture handed out by Darwinists is what Darwinists and other lying, Bible-despising irrationalists claim it is?

        Originally posted by Alate_One View Post
        [Piltdown Man] is the only actual Hoax on your list. But not many scientists were convinced by it since it did not fit well with the other evidence.
        Did Satan put Piltdown Man in the ground to try to confuse people?

        Originally posted by Alate_One View Post
        If you can't accept the evidence of objects in front of you I don't know how we can have a conversation since you don't even accept reality.
        Translation: "If you can't take Darwinism's word for it that the picture I posted is evidence for Darwinism, then I'll just have to take my leave of you and try to find some hapless mark, instead, who will fall for it."
        What evidence do you have to support your claim that what you call "evidence" is evidence?

        MAGA (Masking America's Gullible Apes)

        Comment


        • Originally posted by 7djengo7 View Post
          Why should anybody believe that the provenance of something in a picture handed out by Darwinists is what Darwinists and other lying, Bible-despising irrationalists claim it is?
          https://www.christiansagainstdinosaurs.com/

          Comment


          • https://theologyonline.com/forum/pol...axonomy/page43


            We, of course, can count on User Name to continue to stonewall against the question I asked:

            Why should anybody believe that the provenance of something in a picture handed out by Darwinists is what Darwinists and other lying, Bible-despising irrationalists claim it is?
            What evidence do you have to support your claim that what you call "evidence" is evidence?

            MAGA (Masking America's Gullible Apes)

            Comment


            • Originally posted by 7djengo7 View Post
              Why should anybody believe that the provenance of something in a picture handed out by Darwinists is what Darwinists and other lying, Bible-despising irrationalists claim it is?
              I.e. Dinosaur fossils are a hoax.

              Comment


              • Originally posted by User Name View Post

                I.e. Dinosaur fossils are a hoax.
                I.e. User Name continues to stonewall against the question I asked him:

                Why should anybody believe that the provenance of something in a picture handed out by User Name is what User Name claims it is?

                What evidence do you have to support your claim that what you call "evidence" is evidence?

                MAGA (Masking America's Gullible Apes)

                Comment


                • Originally posted by 7djengo7 View Post
                  Why should anybody believe that the provenance of something in a picture handed out by User Name is what User Name claims it is?
                  Oh, so dinosaur fossils are a hoax? Got it.

                  Comment


                  • Originally posted by User Name View Post

                    Oh, so dinosaur fossils are a hoax? Got it.
                    Oh, so you're a liar? Got it. Again.

                    That you are a liar, of course, is why you have to continue to stonewall against the question I've been asking you:

                    Why should anybody believe that the provenance of something in a picture handed out by User Name is what User Name claims it is?


                    What evidence do you have to support your claim that what you call "evidence" is evidence?

                    MAGA (Masking America's Gullible Apes)

                    Comment


                    • Originally posted by 7djengo7 View Post
                      Why should anybody believe that the provenance of something in a picture handed out by User Name is what User Name claims it is?
                      Well if you think it might be a hoax, why don't you suss it out? Should be good for a laugh at least!

                      Comment


                      • Originally posted by User Name View Post

                        Well if you think it might be a hoax, why don't you suss it out? Should be good for a laugh at least!
                        If what might be a hoax?

                        Does it make you laugh that you are forced to stonewall against the question I asked you:

                        Why should anybody believe that the provenance of something in a picture handed out by User Name is what User Name claims it is?
                        What evidence do you have to support your claim that what you call "evidence" is evidence?

                        MAGA (Masking America's Gullible Apes)

                        Comment


                        • Originally posted by 7djengo7 View Post
                          Why should anybody believe that the provenance of something in a picture handed out by User Name is what User Name claims it is?
                          What picture?

                          Comment


                          • Originally posted by User Name View Post

                            What picture?
                            This picture, for instance:

                            Originally posted by Alate_One View Post
                            What evidence do you have to support your claim that what you call "evidence" is evidence?

                            MAGA (Masking America's Gullible Apes)

                            Comment


                            • Originally posted by Stuu View Post
                              Stuu: So kittens don't necessarily come from cats?
                              Are you asking whether cats necessarily give birth to kittens? If you're asking that, the answer is NO. In fact, spayed cats necessarily do not give birth to kittens.

                              Are you asking whether every kitten was born to a cat? If you're asking that, the answer is YES.

                              Originally posted by Stuu View Post
                              If Similarities do NOT ipso facto indicate a descendant relationship,
                              They do not. For instance, two Ford Broncos have many similarities between one another, but they are automobiles, and automobiles do not have ancestor/descendant, nor parent/offspring relationships.

                              Originally posted by Stuu View Post
                              then there is no need for offspring to look like their parents at all.
                              Well, as Right Divider pointed out already, you have handed us a non sequitur. The fact that similarities do NOT ipso facto entail a descendant relationship does NOT entail that "there is no need for offspring to look like their parents at all".

                              So, you lose again.
                              What evidence do you have to support your claim that what you call "evidence" is evidence?

                              MAGA (Masking America's Gullible Apes)

                              Comment


                              • Originally posted by 7djengo7 View Post
                                Are you asking whether every kitten was born to a cat? If you're asking that, the answer is YES.
                                I appreciate you confirming that this is indeed, in your opinion, a belief of those who are adherents to creationism.

                                Stuart

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X