11 Dec 08
Originally posted by NemesioMany, it shows that he doesn't want to sgow that he doesn't know what he is discussing.
How many points does KellyJay get/lose for repeatedly not answering simple
questions directed at him?
Nemesio
His retorics are here and now "If I don't answer, perhaps they forget the question..."
By the way, Kelly Jay, I'm still waiting of your answer: "Just, let's not forget the links about dinos/Noah, and dino drawings in caves..." remember?
And don't bring up the link from the peruvian stone carving. That was a fraud, and frauds are not proofs.
(Sorry, KJ, if you feel insulted now, but you insult everyone by telling others that they are inferior not beliving the 'obvious' facts that you present, or non-present, as is the cas here.)
11 Dec 08
Originally posted by FabianFnasHave not forgotten you, more of a time issue than anything else.
Many, it shows that he doesn't want to sgow that he doesn't know what he is discussing.
His retorics are here and now "If I don't answer, perhaps they forget the question..."
By the way, Kelly Jay, I'm still waiting of your answer: "Just, let's not forget the links about dinos/Noah, and dino drawings in caves..." remember?
And don't bring up the li ...[text shortened]... beliving the 'obvious' facts that you present, or non-present, as is the cas here.)
I have a 4 day weekend about to hit, I'll get to it then.
Kelly
15 Dec 08
Originally posted by FabianFnasThe one most sure that man and dino lived side by side is Kelly Jay, right?
How long have we been waiting for an answer, KJ? It's a really long time since you got the question the first time. Is it time to give up and turn your mind? Evolution is a wonderful creation of god isn't it?
He couldn't produce any proof that there are cave drawings. He promised but he failed. He was sure, though, that he was right about this.
So now I'm about to draw the conclusion that KellyJay didn't know what he was talking about.
I don't think KJ would invent a thought of man/dino living in the same time himself, so he must obviously be lied to. By whom? Well, som fraud, trying to persuade him to belive in proposterous thing to have salvation eventually. By whom? Satan himself perhaps...
Sorry, there were never dinos living in the same time as man, can we stop laughing now? KJ's theory of creation was dead wrong. And his honour has been diminished.
Evolution, on the other hand, have lot of proofs of its existance, so from now on, can we skip any creation hoaxes?
15 Dec 08
Originally posted by FabianFnasDo we know for certain that man (or manlike species) did not exist 65
The one most sure that man and dino lived side by side is Kelly Jay, right?
million years ago? I'm seriously asking, because it just dawned on me
that all we know about 65 million years ago is what we've found
exploring, what?.. an almost whole percent of the entire surface of earth
that we've managed to uncover from that period in time?
Kinda makes you wonder what's left to find, so I personally tend not to
make any assumptions this way or the other. I've stuck my foot in my
mouth so many times I kinda got to liking the flavour, but not right
now... it's really, really sweaty right now, and the stench... oh, the
stench. Smells like it was actually there some 65 million years ago, you
know?
Not to mention this navel fuzz. By God, the crazy things that get stuck in
our navels. And you mean to tell me that there's absolutely no chance
that man and dinosaurs existed simultaneously, even in the light of this!
* Holding up exhibit A!
If this is possible after only a day, believe me... we have yet to uncover
many, many strange and puzzling things. I give ten year tops before
they say...
* Looking at feet B!
No... no... I want do it. I stand undecided on this issue. HA! Can't touch
me!
15 Dec 08
Originally posted by JigtieYes, we know for sure that man wasn't there 65 million of years ago, together with the dinos.
Do we know for certain that man (or manlike species) did not exist 65
million years ago? I'm seriously asking, because it just dawned on me
that all we know about 65 million years ago is what we've found
exploring, what?.. an almost whole percent of the entire surface of earth
that we've managed to uncover from that period in time?
Kinda makes you ...[text shortened]... cided on this issue. HA! Can't touch
me!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UWj1KGV2wb8
(1) We have fossils of primates from 5 million of years ago, until the modern man, in a line with small steps in between, showing more and more resemblence of man as times goes. From 65 million of years ago we have no primate fossils at all. Fossils of primitive mammals are found.
(2) The age of fossils can be measured with several methods. No fossils of primates are found from the oldest humanlike primate, of the age of 5 million of years, beyond that there are none. But mammal fossils ave been found, dated to 65 million of years old.
(3) Something happened at 65 million of years ago. Dinos went into extintion, mammals got their chance to evolve. Evolution got a boast finding new niches.
(4) There are no proofs, none whatsoever, that man lived 65 million of years ago, at the time of dinos.
15 Dec 08
1 edit
Originally posted by FabianFnasThat was not the question. The question was if we know for certain
there are no proofs, none whatsoever, that man lived 65 million of years ago, at the time of dinos.
(having explored yet a teensy weensy bit of earth's total surface from
that time period) that man (or manlike species) did not exist
some 65 million years ago. I think you're setting yourself up for the taste
of feet there, buddy.
(Whisper: Just make sure you wash them with something tasty first, like
coconut milk or Piña Colada, and it's not really all that bad. 😉 )
15 Dec 08
1 edit
Originally posted by JigtieThe answer is still: Yes we know for certain.
That was not the question. The question was if we know for [b]certain
(having explored yet a teensy weensy bit of earth's total surface from
that time period) that man (or manlike species) did not exist
some 65 million years ago. I think you're setting yourself up for the taste
of feet there, buddy.
(Whisper: Just make sure you ...[text shortened]... g tasty first, like
coconut milk or Piña Colada, and it's not really all that bad. 😉 )[/b]
We haven't found any manlike fossils older than 5 million of years (I write man-like (perhaps I should write humanoid, or proto-human, but I think you know what I mean), and the one found from 5 million of years aren't directly as you or me either. 65 million of years ago are 13 times the age, compared with 5 million of years. So if the soil is empty of fossils from humans, but rich in other fossils, then we have to make the conclusion that before 5 million of years, there weren't any humans.
So, yes, we are pretty certain. As we are certain that the moon is not made of green cheese.
15 Dec 08
Originally posted by FabianFnasA-HA! Exactly my point. I rest my case. Lean back in my chair. Enjoy the
The answer is still: Yes we know for certain. [...] So, yes, we are pretty certain.
whiskey and the After Eight. The musky scent of joy reeking on my lower
abdomen. She says thanks. I nod arrogantly. She knows it's love. I know.
It doesn't get much better than this; the Internet. And she was good too.
16 Dec 08
Originally posted by Jigtie…(having explored yet a teensy weensy bit of earth's total surface from
That was not the question. The question was if we know for [b]certain
(having explored yet a teensy weensy bit of earth's total surface from
that time period) that man (or manlike species) did not exist
some 65 million years ago. I think you're setting yourself up for the taste
of feet there, buddy.
(Whisper: Just make sure you ...[text shortened]... g tasty first, like
coconut milk or Piña Colada, and it's not really all that bad. 😉 )[/b]
that time period)
..…
What do you mean? we can “explore” (if that is the right word) the surface from
that time period by examining the layers of sedimentary laid down from that time period.
P.S. given the scientific evidence (or perhaps I should say given what is NOT contained in the scientific evidence), we can be certain as we can be that man did not exist some 65 million years ago -have you got any scientific evidence to the contrary?
16 Dec 08
Originally posted by Andrew HamiltonExactly, my point. And given the total area we've explored so far from
we can be certain as we can be
the given time-period, it's not very certain is it?
It's one thing to say: "Current evidence doesn't support the idea of
primates living during the same time as dinosaurs". I could go for that,
sort of. It's quite another to say, with absolute certainty: "Primates did
not exist at the same time as dinosaurs", given the relatively tiny total
area we've covered so far. (No, not layers, area. You can dig up tons of
dirt in a 5 square meter area, and you've still just covered 5 square
meters of any given time-period, am I right?)
Besides, not only did dinosaurs co-exist with humans, but are doing so
to this day. See for yourself:
😛
Ok, there was a time warp involved there, but seriously: crocodiles?