[noumenal]

Man cohabitating with dinosaurs:

 

Discuss.

[Pookie]

 

Finally, a motion picture about dinosaurs that leads youth away from evolutionism, instead of into it! This well-illustrated production reveals new perspectives on how dinosaurs properly fit into history. Fascinating to young and old alike! Counter-acts Evolutionary teaching, and provides evidence that Man and dinosaurs lived together, as confirmed by the Bible. Very popular!

[SpectralJulianIsNotDead]

Who cares? They're dead.

"Think about the future."

[Пятхъдесят Шест]

The mysterious (or fake) Ica stones of Peru.

 

[king_buzzo]

 

[Danny Himself]

Dinosaurs are great. I don't know about evolution, though.

[Tokolosh]

The theory of evolution is a religious belief, and natural selection is still a myth.

[Norma J]

Evolution, smevolution. I'm with Danny. Dinosaurs are indeed great.

[Rob Instigator]

what is religious about it?

scietific "theories" are not blind dogma to be believed without evidence.

learn something.

DARWIN forever

[atari 2600]

Originally Posted by Tokolosh

The theory of evolution is a religious belief, and natural selection is still a myth.

I found this post from Tokolosh rather bizarre myself.

Just because science doesn't fully understand the mechanisms of evolution in living organisms doesn't mean that evolution isn't scientifically proven.

Thus, evolution is generally accepted in the scientific community. Thus, it is still referred to as a theory.
This doesn't mean, however, that scientists are "buying in" to acceptance of evolution through some sort of religion-based "need" or "faith in science."
Scientists know without any doubts that evolution of species occurred, they just respectfully still refer to evolution as a theory because a) there is always more to know and learn about the mechanism of evolution and the deep mysteries of origin of species b) they rely on funding from political bodies that do not want evolution to be referred to as "fact" in the general culture.

And, to the topic query, I believe noumenal already knows that early humanoids and proper (large reptilian) dinosaurs never coexisted.

[sonicl]

There is currently a movement among some religious groups in the UK for the teaching of evolution in schools to be banned, and for it to be replaced by the teaching of the biblical creation story. They claim that the creation story can be no more scientifically disproved than evolution, and that the creation story should therefore be taught as science.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sn/tvradio/prog...izon/war.shtml

[Tokolosh]

You may say to yourself, "Darwinism is not a religion, it is a scientific theory!" But there are many people in the world who are devoted to it. Some believe that evolution is a scientifically proven fact, and the world lies under the influence of this so called scientific position.
Darwinism did not begin with the theory established by the amateur observations and investigations of Charles Darwin and other scientists in the 19th century. Its origins go back to much earlier materialist philosophies. Darwinist beliefs were first encountered a few thousand years ago in the polytheistic and materialistic religions of Greece and Sumeria. Therefore, Charles Darwin was not the first person to put forward the idea of evolution; he was an amateur researcher who traced the main outlines of this basic belief, gave form to its doctrines, and later established a theory.

There are scientists today, that see many flaws in his work and consider it a pagan religion.

[porkmarras]

I can't think of anything putting more of a 'twist' in the story than that.

[Rob Instigator]

Originally Posted by sonicl

There is currently a movement among some religious groups in the UK for the teaching of evolution in schools to be banned, and for it to be replaced by the teaching of the biblical creation story. They claim that the creation story can be no more scientifically disproved than evolution, and that the creation story should therefore be taught as science.

they are following the lead of the ignorant ultra-fundamentalist christians in the USA. I hate these fuckers. they are leading the next generation down a very very slipery path. all it takes is ONE generation to stop reading and learning and thinking critically ad the whole shebang goes to shit for a hundred years (europe's dark ages, where, due to religious fundamentalism, they "forgot" that the earth was round, that communicable disease was prevented through sanitation, etc.)

[atari 2600]

There are ridiculous amounts of factual evidence, Tokolosh.

More gets discovered every day that fits the puzzle.

It's really to the point that to say you don't believe evolution occurred is like saying you choose to live in ignorance of the truth. It's a bit like living in a cave, or under a rock, with head planted firmly in the sand.

If evolution were folly it would have been found out a long time ago, especially considering all the obstinate adversity to evolutionary theory that persists even to this day.

[Rob Instigator]

Originally Posted by Tokolosh

You may say to yourself, "Darwinism is not a religion, it is a scientific theory!" But there are many people in the world who are devoted to it. Some believe that evolution is a scientifically proven fact, and the world lies under the influence of this so called scientific position.
Darwinism did not begin with the theory established by the amateur observations and investigations of Charles Darwin and other scientists in the 19th century. Its origins go back to much earlier materialist philosophies. Darwinist beliefs were first encountered a few thousand years ago in the polytheistic and materialistic religions of Greece and Sumeria. Therefore, Charles Darwin was not the first person to put forward the idea of evolution; he was an amateur researcher who traced the main outlines of this basic belief, gave form to its doctrines, and later established a theory.

There are scientists today, that see many flaws in his work and consider it a pagan religion.

do you not understand that darwin started it, and it has been subsequently verified by hundreds if not thousands of experiments and scientists, all working independently? and that not ONCE has there been any experimental results that NEGATE natural selection? and that geneticists have combed our dna and not negated our inter-relatedness as living things?
that is another cheap argument by the fools that claim natural selection is a religion which they choose to label "darwinism" it is BULLSHIT.
darwin was flawed, no doubt, but so is every new thinker. Isaac newton got some things wrong too, but does that negate his observations about inertia and gravity and the elliptical nature of the planets' orbits?

NO

[Tokolosh]

No one has ever observed the origin of a new species by selection, natural or otherwise. Bacteria should be the easiest organisms in which to observe this, because bacteria can produce thousands of generations in a matter of months, and they can be subjected to powerful mutation-causing agents and intense selection. Nevertheless, in over a century of research no new species of bacteria have emerged.

Can any of you explain this?

[Toilet & Bowels]

what about germs that develope resistance to antibiotics?

[Toilet & Bowels]

personaly i am particularly interested in the work of Herbert Edgar Wyndham who experimented with genetic manipulation.

[Tokolosh]

Don't get me wrong. I agree with many of Darwins theories, but there are still many questions left unanswered about natural selection and evolution.