Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Biological Taxonomy - Kinds vs. Species (Linnaean taxonomy)

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

  • 7djengo7
    replied
    Originally posted by User Name View Post

    What picture?
    This picture, for instance:

    Originally posted by Alate_One View Post

    Leave a comment:


  • User Name
    replied
    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?

    Leave a comment:


  • 7djengo7
    replied
    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?

    Leave a comment:


  • User Name
    replied
    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!

    Leave a comment:


  • 7djengo7
    replied
    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?


    Leave a comment:


  • User Name
    replied
    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.

    Leave a comment:


  • 7djengo7
    replied
    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?

    Leave a comment:


  • User Name
    replied
    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.

    Leave a comment:


  • 7djengo7
    replied
    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?

    Leave a comment:


  • User Name
    replied
    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/

    Leave a comment:


  • 7djengo7
    replied
    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."

    Leave a comment:


  • Alate_One
    replied
    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.

    Leave a comment:


  • 7djengo7
    replied
    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!!!

    Leave a comment:


  • User Name
    replied
    Originally posted by Alate_One View Post
    You could, I don't know, NOT be intentionally dense?
    That's asking too much of 7djengo7. Now you're expecting miracles!

    Leave a comment:


  • Alate_One
    replied
    Originally posted by 7djengo7 View Post
    If by your pronoun, "this", you are referring to the rock in your picture, my answer would be that that rock is also a non-dinosaur. I, myself, would not say that any rock is a dinosaur.
    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 certainly have a position on the matter, but you're now the one that's refusing to answer. You said birds are non-dinosaurs.

    Is the creature I posted a picture of earlier, a dinosaur or non-dinosaur? It's the same question you keep insisting on others answering and now you won't answer it yourself.
    Last edited by Alate_One; November 25th, 2019, 04:58 PM.

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X