Sunday, April 26, 2009

Fossil FAIL!

Posted at CARM on April 26th, 2009. Creationist: Wavey

Wavy asked for proof of an old Earth - so we gave him this picture: Dinosaur Fossil.

His reply:
A bone in a rock. Hint - bones can't talk and neither can rocks. They have to be interpreted within a framework of assumptions.

Ummm....what bone? You mean the footprint? Wow - can't identify a footprint, eh? Don't you think that you're then unable to debate this subject fully?

-Erin

Taxonomu FAIL

Posted at AIG (Answers in Genesis) on April 25th, 2009. Creationist: Probably Hamm, but we'll just say: Generic Creationist that Thinks They Know Lots About Science.

Background: Fossil Seal with Arms Discovered

AIG quote from their article, which can be read HERE:
"Or it could have even been from a broader created kind that included such creatures as otters and beavers"

Scientists reply:
Since when are otters are mustelids and beavers rodents!?


Mustelids: any of numerous carnivorous mammals of the family Mustelidae, comprising the weasels, martens, skunks, badgers, and otters.

Rodents: belonging or pertaining to the gnawing or nibbling mammals of the order Rodentia, including the mice, squirrels, beavers, etc.

Pinnipeds: belonging to the Pinnipedia, a suborder of carnivores with limbs adapted to an aquatic life, including the seals and walruses.

Huh - they don't sound alike at all! And what is this "kind" nonsense still going around?

Beaver KIND. Otter KIND. There is no such thing as a kind - the closest you get is species. And just because "it looks kind of like an otter" doesn't mean that it IS an otter.

I think some people look kind of like a chimpanzee (Bush for example), but that doesn't mean that they ARE chimpanzees.

Silly Creationists.

-Erin

Marriage FAIL

Posted at CARM on April 26th, 2009. Posted by Dr. K

Dr.K's original comment:
Adam and Eve were married because in biblical marriage it is not the ceremony which matters. It is the consummation. I thought you knew that.

Follow up:
Well that certainly is a new concept. Having sex makes a couple married, millions will be shocked by that. And most certainly it implies that the homosexual marriage issue is now settled.

LMAO! Sex means you're married?! Ppft.

-Erin

Time FAIL

Posted at CARM on April 26, 2009. Creationist: the Legendary Dr.K

Original Comment: (talking about length of days and weeks to back up Genesis and the "fact" that the Earth was created with everything on it in 6 literal days).
I gave you support of my positions for evenings and mornings by using the Book of Daniel. However you deliberately ignored it. Keep burying your head in the sand.

Dr.K's response:
The Book of Daniel talks about 'weeks of years', one week in this case equalling seven years, which is clearly deducible from the text of Daniel. Daniel is saying that a week has seven days. Are you arguing with him?

Wait a minute - "one week equals seven years - can't you tell that he was saying that a week has seven days in it from reading that literally?"

No - I can't. Literally has nothing to do with it. Literally means that "one week equals seven years". Herm.

Not to mention that the book of Daniel where it talks about this part is told from recounting a DREAM. How many dreams should be taken as literal? None. lol Good try though Dr.K.

-Erin

Thursday, April 23, 2009

Genome FAIL

Posted at CARM on April 23rd, 2009. Creationist: Sport

Original comment:
The cat base pair sequence is different than that of humans, as are those of the kangaroo and mouse. Hence, they are not much the same, even though they may be the same genes and are perhaps in the same place on the chromosome. Saying otherwise is like looking at a lamborghini and a beat up, old pinto on blocks and saying that because they're both care, they're much the same.

On the other hand, your articles are also talking about positioning. So, if mine have nothing to do with the "core theory of evolution", neither does yours. The core theory of evolution to be very plain doesn't require the differences to be genetic either, merely heritable. If you don't like the genetics aspect of it, take it up with Mendel, not Darwin. Additionally, non-coding DNA would be important in any comparison.

Now, since you want to get down to the actual base pairs:
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/nuccore/...om=1&to=167280
Humans, chromosome 1

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/nuccore/...=1&to=19418419
Mouse, chromosome 1

When you get done, you'll see that there is a very significant amount of genetic difference.

Sport's Response:
show me.....and while you're at it, show me how it is that these sequences make "catness" as opposed to "humanness." science only, please.

What the hell is humanness? *sigh* Sport wouldn't know science if it bit him in the butt.

-Erin

Monday, April 20, 2009

Just Plain FAIL

Posted at CARM on April 20th, 2009. Possible Creationist: 4ale

4ale original comment:
Have you seen the documentary/movie "Expelled - No Intelligence Allowed" by Ben Stein? If not, you might like watching it. It's an unbiased look at Creation vs. Evolution.

Un huh. Unbiased? Riiiiiight. Check out Expelled Exposed and that should clear it up for you. And how is equating the Theory of Evolution with the Holocaust at all unbiased?

-Erin

Friday, April 17, 2009

Cloud FAIL

Posted at CARM on April 17th, 2009. Creationist: Dr. K (again I know...but he's such a fount of....something I'm sure).

Original Comment (made by me):
Volcanoes emit more water vapor than anything else (well...except for lava). It's easy to see that on a planet as volatile as one where the processes are still kicking into high gear, vulcanism would contribute a lot of water.

Non-Creationist post:
If I was on the ball I'd be asking how volcanoes that are not near the sea could actually put their vapor into the nearest mass of water. And I'd be asking why the vapor doesn't eVAPORate.

Wow. Does your brain hurt after that one? Mine did. Why don't clouds evaporate!

-Erin