Did Dinosaurs really exist?

by **lights1961** » Sat Jan 29, 2011 3:45 am

yes, its called still living in the mentality of the 60s and 70s... even though its 2011... example your professors
at any university that still wears his plaid jacket... and who teach moderen music classes about the Rolling Stones and the WHO, while getting high with his students... just saying...

HILARIOUS poll Don... sorry about that... fixed...

by **Rhiannon** » Sat Jan 29, 2011 3:48 am

S2M wrote:Hmmmm....what to believe? This is a toughie.....The carbon dating of some dinosaur bones, and cave paintings made from berry juice.....or some boook about an unshaven man talking to a burning bush....Wow. I'm stumped.

You're right, I forgot about that whole passage regarding, "Thou shalt take thine passages literally, and the Lord spake, 'Dinosaurs are a trick of Lucifer'."

by **Behshad** » Sat Jan 29, 2011 3:52 am

lights1961 wrote:yes, its called still living in the mentality of the 60s and 70s... even though its 2011... example your professors
at any university that still wears his plaid jacket... and who teach moderen music classes about the Rolling Stones and the WHO, while getting high with his students... just saying...

HILARIOUS poll B...

Thank you ?

by **StevePerryHair** » Sat Jan 29, 2011 6:58 am

Behshad wrote:
lights1961 wrote:yes, its called still living in the mentality of the 60s and 70s... even though its 2011... example your professors
at any university that still wears his plaid jacket... and who teach moderen music classes about the Rolling Stones and the WHO, while getting high with his students... just saying...

HILARIOUS poll B...

Thank you ?

Well... DON.... BEHSHAD.. easy mistake? :lol:

by **Seven Wishes2** » Sat Jan 29, 2011 7:12 am

S2M wrote:Hmmmm....what to believe? This is a toughie.....The carbon dating of some dinosaur bones, and cave paintings made from berry juice.....or some boook about an unshaven man talking to a burning bush....Wow. I'm stumped.

Exactly.

Um....RWF...and any other pure-blooded "creationists"...and, BTW...I believe the more the definitive the proof of the miracle of evolution, the more plausible the concept of intelligent design becomes (my jury is hung on that one, as my Catholic upbringing is in constant intellectual conflict with my passion for forensic anthropology)...there are literally scores of other discoveries that irrefutably point to the same conclusion.

http://rspb.royalsocietypublishing.org/content/early/2009/11/09/rspb.2009.1440.full?sid=c42d9ae5-d3c8-4409-9f86-ca311c9a5632

These findings were published in the Proceedings of the Royal Society B, a peer-reviewed journal based in London, England.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W498fFVBeEA

A new transitional sauropodomorph dinosaur from the Early Jurassic of South Africa and the evolution of sauropod feeding and quadrupedalism:

Cursorial ability appears to have been reduced and the weight bearing axis of the pes shifted to a medial, entaxonic position, falsifying the hypothesis that entaxony evolved in sauropods only after an obligate quadrupedal gait had been adopted.

by **StevePerryHair** » Sat Jan 29, 2011 7:14 am

Seven Wishes wrote:
S2M wrote:Hmmmm....what to believe? This is a toughie.....The carbon dating of some dinosaur bones, and cave paintings made from berry juice.....or some boook about an unshaven man talking to a burning bush....Wow. I'm stumped.

Exactly.

Um....RWF...and any other pure-blooded "creationists"...and, BTW...I believe the more the definitive the proof of the miracle of evolution, the more plausible the concept of intelligent design becomes (my jury is hung on that one, as my Catholic upbringing is in constant intellectual conflict with my passion for forensic anthropology)...there are literally scores of other discoveries that irrefutably point to the same conclusion.

http://rspb.royalsocietypublishing.org/content/early/2009/11/09/rspb.2009.1440.full?sid=c42d9ae5-d3c8-4409-9f86-ca311c9a5632

These findings were published in the Proceedings of the Royal Society B, a peer-reviewed journal based in London, England.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W498fFVBeEA

A new transitional sauropodomorph dinosaur from the Early Jurassic of South Africa and the evolution of sauropod feeding and quadrupedalism:

Cursorial ability appears to have been reduced and the weight bearing axis of the pes shifted to a medial, entaxonic position, falsifying the hypothesis that entaxony evolved in sauropods only after an obligate quadrupedal gait had been adopted.

The catholic church does not preach creationism. Yet that conflicts you?

by **Seven Wishes2** » Sat Jan 29, 2011 7:19 am

I'm not conflicted about creationism. I'm conflicted about the concept of intelligent design.

I'm older. When I was growing up and going to Catholic and/or British military schools in Europe, creationism wasn't just taught as an alternative, it was the accepted truth.

The Catholic Church has always accepted the validity of allegorical interpretations of Scripture. St. Augustine, the most influential Christian theologian (and not just for Catholics), found the Old Testament to be an obstacle to his conversion until his mentor explained that it should not be taken literally. Even in the 5th century, people understood that not everything in the Bible could be literally true. Literalist fundamentalism is a relatively recent phenomenon in the history of Christianity. It is a reaction to the excesses of modernism and scientism.

by **StevePerryHair** » Sat Jan 29, 2011 7:19 am

Here 7wishes:

http://www.catholic.com/library/Adam_Ev ... lution.asp

And

http://www.catholic.org/hf/faith/story.php?id=39854

by **Seven Wishes2** » Sat Jan 29, 2011 7:21 am

I'm not sure why you posted those links since a) I'm fully aware of the official position of the Church on these issues, and b) I just stated my internal "conflict" pertained to the concept of intelligent design and not creationism. Thanks, though.

by **StevePerryHair** » Sat Jan 29, 2011 7:22 am

Seven Wishes wrote:I'm not sure why you posted those links since a) I'm fully aware of the official position of the Church on these issues, and b) I just stated my internal "conflict" pertained to the concept of intelligent design and not creationism. Thanks, though.

a) your first post said that your catholic upbringing conflicted...

b) I posted that WHILE you were posting your response.. duh.

by **Seven Wishes2** » Sat Jan 29, 2011 7:33 am

No need to get all Gloria Steinem on me there, SPH. I didn't know you were in the process of writing a response when I made my post. Just a matter of semantics.

I'd love to know from whom the "no" vote came.

by **S2M** » Sat Jan 29, 2011 7:35 am

Seven Wishes wrote:No need to get all Gloria Steinem on me there, SPH. I didn't know you were in the process of writing a response when I made my post. Just a matter of semantics.

I'd love to know from whom the "no" vote came.

Phyllis....her info isn't vicarious. :lol:

by **StevePerryHair** » Sat Jan 29, 2011 7:42 am

Seven Wishes wrote:No need to get all Gloria Steinem on me there, SPH. I didn't know you were in the process of writing a response when I made my post. Just a matter of semantics.

I'd love to know from whom the "no" vote came.

That made me a nazi-feminist?? :shock:

by **StevePerryHair** » Sat Jan 29, 2011 7:46 am

S2M wrote:
Seven Wishes wrote:No need to get all Gloria Steinem on me there, SPH. I didn't know you were in the process of writing a response when I made my post. Just a matter of semantics.

I'd love to know from whom the "no" vote came.

Phyllis....her info isn't vicarious.

No, Phyl would have written a 5 paragraph essay to say what I did in 2 sentences

And I only used a&b because he seemed to like that

by **Seven Wishes2** » Sat Jan 29, 2011 7:49 am

StevePerryHair wrote:
Seven Wishes wrote:No need to get all Gloria Steinem on me there, SPH. I didn't know you were in the process of writing a response when I made my post. Just a matter of semantics.

I'd love to know from whom the "no" vote came.

That made me a nazi-feminist??

No, no. Just the assumption that because I have a John Thomas, I must therefore think with it and have the cranial capacity of early Cro-Magnon. :wink:

And Dave, RWF, and FF, I would appreciate it if you didn't follow this up with a crack about the veracity of the Cro-Magnon assertion and its inexorable relationship with my leftist leanings.

by **S2M** » Sat Jan 29, 2011 7:51 am

Seven Wishes wrote:
StevePerryHair wrote:
Seven Wishes wrote:No need to get all Gloria Steinem on me there, SPH. I didn't know you were in the process of writing a response when I made my post. Just a matter of semantics.

I'd love to know from whom the "no" vote came.

That made me a nazi-feminist??

No, no. Just the assumption that because I have a John Thomas, I must therefore think with it and have the cranial capacity of early Cro-Magnon.

And Dave, RWF, and FF, I would appreciate it if you didn't follow this up with a crack about the veracity of the Cro-Magnon assertion and its inexorable relationship with my leftist leanings.

I would have said Piltdown Man, but hey...if you prefer Cro-Mag - have at it.... :lol:

by **StevePerryHair** » Sat Jan 29, 2011 7:51 am

Seven Wishes wrote:
StevePerryHair wrote:
Seven Wishes wrote:No need to get all Gloria Steinem on me there, SPH. I didn't know you were in the process of writing a response when I made my post. Just a matter of semantics.

I'd love to know from whom the "no" vote came.

That made me a nazi-feminist??

No, no. Just the assumption that because I have a John Thomas, I must therefore think with it and have the cranial capacity of early Cro-Magnon.

You and S2M should go and start a board of your own where you can speak your language together :lol:

I wasn't talking down to you. I just responded with a&b because you did, and I used a laugh emoticon cause I was laughing! :lol:

by **RedWingFan** » Sat Jan 29, 2011 7:52 am

StevePerryHair wrote:
S2M wrote:
Seven Wishes wrote:No need to get all Gloria Steinem on me there, SPH. I didn't know you were in the process of writing a response when I made my post. Just a matter of semantics.

I'd love to know from whom the "no" vote came.

Phyllis....her info isn't vicarious.

No, Phyl would have written a 5 paragraph essay to say what I did in 2 sentences And I only used a&b because he seemed to like that

***correction*** She didn't know what a paragraph was.

by **Seven Wishes2** » Sat Jan 29, 2011 7:53 am

I know you weren't. I was just having a spot o' fun. You're a cool cat.

by **StevePerryHair** » Sat Jan 29, 2011 7:53 am

RedWingFan wrote:
StevePerryHair wrote:
S2M wrote:
Seven Wishes wrote:No need to get all Gloria Steinem on me there, SPH. I didn't know you were in the process of writing a response when I made my post. Just a matter of semantics.

I'd love to know from whom the "no" vote came.

Phyllis....her info isn't vicarious.

No, Phyl would have written a 5 paragraph essay to say what I did in 2 sentences And I only used a&b because he seemed to like that

***correction*** She didn't know what a paragraph was.

This is true! :lol:

by **Behshad** » Sat Jan 29, 2011 8:03 am

Actually, Phyl is the only one whos YES vote could be backed up by proof, as she used to have one as a pet when she was a little girl 63 million years ago

by **lights1961** » Sat Jan 29, 2011 8:19 am

lights1961 wrote:yes, its called still living in the mentality of the 60s and 70s... even though its 2011... example your professors
at any university that still wears his plaid jacket... and who teach moderen music classes about the Rolling Stones and the WHO, while getting high with his students... just saying...

HILARIOUS poll Don... sorry about that... fixed...

fixed my error... sorry Don for not giving you the credit...

by **Don** » Sat Jan 29, 2011 8:38 am

lights1961 wrote:
lights1961 wrote:yes, its called still living in the mentality of the 60s and 70s... even though its 2011... example your professors
at any university that still wears his plaid jacket... and who teach moderen music classes about the Rolling Stones and the WHO, while getting high with his students... just saying...

HILARIOUS poll Don... sorry about that... fixed...

fixed my error... sorry Don for not giving you the credit...

Huh, What? I've been dicking around on FaceBook all afternoon, I'm not sure what you're talking about.
You know what, nevermind, it's all good. :lol:

by **StevePerryHair** » Sat Jan 29, 2011 8:40 am

Don wrote:
lights1961 wrote:
lights1961 wrote:yes, its called still living in the mentality of the 60s and 70s... even though its 2011... example your professors
at any university that still wears his plaid jacket... and who teach moderen music classes about the Rolling Stones and the WHO, while getting high with his students... just saying...

HILARIOUS poll Don... sorry about that... fixed...

fixed my error... sorry Don for not giving you the credit...

Huh, What? I've been dicking around on FaceBook all afternoon, I'm not sure what you're talking about.
You know what, nevermind, it's all good.

Then who was using your screen name when it was dicking around here! :shock:

by **lights1961** » Sat Jan 29, 2011 8:40 am

Don wrote:
lights1961 wrote:
lights1961 wrote:yes, its called still living in the mentality of the 60s and 70s... even though its 2011... example your professors
at any university that still wears his plaid jacket... and who teach moderen music classes about the Rolling Stones and the WHO, while getting high with his students... just saying...

HILARIOUS poll Don... sorry about that... fixed...

fixed my error... sorry Don for not giving you the credit...

Huh, What? I've been dicking around on FaceBook all afternoon, I'm not sure what you're talking about.
You know what, nevermind, it's all good.

must be really bored... ;-)

Oh I thought this was one of B's polls...

by **StevePerryHair** » Sat Jan 29, 2011 8:41 am

lights1961 wrote:
Don wrote:
lights1961 wrote:
lights1961 wrote:yes, its called still living in the mentality of the 60s and 70s... even though its 2011... example your professors
at any university that still wears his plaid jacket... and who teach moderen music classes about the Rolling Stones and the WHO, while getting high with his students... just saying...

HILARIOUS poll Don... sorry about that... fixed...

fixed my error... sorry Don for not giving you the credit...

Huh, What? I've been dicking around on FaceBook all afternoon, I'm not sure what you're talking about.
You know what, nevermind, it's all good.

must be really bored... Oh I thought this was one of B's polls...

Well, he is the poll master...easy mistake! :lol:

by **Don** » Sat Jan 29, 2011 8:56 am

StevePerryHair wrote:
Don wrote:
lights1961 wrote:
lights1961 wrote:yes, its called still living in the mentality of the 60s and 70s... even though its 2011... example your professors
at any university that still wears his plaid jacket... and who teach moderen music classes about the Rolling Stones and the WHO, while getting high with his students... just saying...

HILARIOUS poll Don... sorry about that... fixed...

fixed my error... sorry Don for not giving you the credit...

Huh, What? I've been dicking around on FaceBook all afternoon, I'm not sure what you're talking about.
You know what, nevermind, it's all good.
Then who was using your screen name when it was dicking around here!

That was me before my 1pm runaround. Remember, I'm on the Left Coast.

by **StevePerryHair** » Sat Jan 29, 2011 9:25 am

Don wrote:
StevePerryHair wrote:
Don wrote:
lights1961 wrote:
lights1961 wrote:yes, its called still living in the mentality of the 60s and 70s... even though its 2011... example your professors
at any university that still wears his plaid jacket... and who teach moderen music classes about the Rolling Stones and the WHO, while getting high with his students... just saying...

HILARIOUS poll Don... sorry about that... fixed...

fixed my error... sorry Don for not giving you the credit...

Huh, What? I've been dicking around on FaceBook all afternoon, I'm not sure what you're talking about.
You know what, nevermind, it's all good.
Then who was using your screen name when it was dicking around here!

That was me before my 1pm runaround. Remember, I'm on the Left Coast.

I always forget about you lefties! :lol:

by **artist4perry** » Sat Jan 29, 2011 10:29 am

Dinosaurs exist. Because I don't believe in evolution does not mean I don't believe in dinosaurs. :roll:

by **artist4perry** » Sat Jan 29, 2011 10:33 am

conversationpc wrote:
G.I.Jim wrote:
conversationpc wrote:
steveo777 wrote:
Angel wrote:
Gin and Tonic Sky wrote:Yes they existed, and people kept them as pets. I saw it on the Flintstones with my own two eyes.

...and some of them were even gay, I saw that on Barney with my own two eyes.

There were lesbian Dinosaurs. They were called Lickalotapusses.

...and the others were Cockasauruses?

You misspelled it, it's "Cockinsoreasses"!

BWAHAHAHAA!!!!!!!

BWWWWWWWwwwwaaaaaaaaaaaaaHaaaaaahaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa! Don a funny thread. Lightening up the mood much! You guys made me laugh so hard I fell of my Dinosaur! :shock:

MR

Did Dinosaurs really exist?

Did Dinosaurs really exist?

Who is online