Truth in Science versus the poor old Platypus

This forum is for the discussion of the evidence for evolution. Anyone is welcome to post, however, scripture is not allowed. As the title says, Science Only please!

Moderator: Moderators

Truth in Science versus the poor old Platypus

Postby Anonymous » Fri Jul 11, 2008 3:01 pm

What did the Platypus do to deserve it.

http://www.truthinscience.org.uk/site/c ... ew/274/65/
Anonymous
 

Re: Truth in Science versus the poor old Platypus

Postby Roger Stanyard » Fri Jul 11, 2008 3:30 pm

Mike Brass wrote:What did the Platypus do to deserve it.

http://www.truthinscience.org.uk/site/c ... ew/274/65/


Truth in Science no doubt sounds like a learned organisation to the layman. Pity though that it does not provide its own explanation of the origi of the platypus/ Now that would make for interesting "science". We would all know that sort of "kind" it is and whether it was on Noah's Ark.
User avatar
Roger Stanyard
Forum Admin
 
Posts: 6162
Joined: Sat Oct 07, 2006 4:59 pm

Re: Truth in Science versus the poor old Platypus

Postby Michael » Fri Jul 11, 2008 3:52 pm

Roger Stanyard wrote:
Mike Brass wrote:What did the Platypus do to deserve it.

http://www.truthinscience.org.uk/site/c ... ew/274/65/


Truth in Science no doubt sounds like a learned organisation to the layman. Pity though that it does not provide its own explanation of the origi of the platypus/ Now that would make for interesting "science". We would all know that sort of "kind" it is and whether it was on Noah's Ark.


It is quite simple. It was late afternoon and the Intelligent Designer was getting tired and muddled up a few bits.
Michael
 
Posts: 2786
Joined: Mon Oct 09, 2006 1:30 pm
Location: Lancaster

Re: Truth in Science versus the poor old Platypus

Postby Roger Stanyard » Fri Jul 11, 2008 3:57 pm

Mike Brass wrote:What did the Platypus do to deserve it.

http://www.truthinscience.org.uk/site/c ... ew/274/65/


Strange, isn't it that these "learned" postings on Truth in Science's web site appear to have no know author and nobody appears to have peer reviewed them before posting.

It doesn't take half a brain to see through the lot of them. It's the old game of finding "alledged" holes in science without the bother of of posting an alternative explanation. That's because they have to deceive because everyone would, rightly, laugh at them if they claimed the world was 6,000 years old and a platypus is descended from a "kind".

The daftest one I have seen recently is that because giraffes have long necks, the theory of evolution is wrong. Well, if they had short necks, what would that indicate about evolution?
User avatar
Roger Stanyard
Forum Admin
 
Posts: 6162
Joined: Sat Oct 07, 2006 4:59 pm

Re: Truth in Science versus the poor old Platypus

Postby Anonymous » Fri Jul 11, 2008 3:58 pm

Michael wrote:
Roger Stanyard wrote:
Mike Brass wrote:What did the Platypus do to deserve it.

http://www.truthinscience.org.uk/site/c ... ew/274/65/


Truth in Science no doubt sounds like a learned organisation to the layman. Pity though that it does not provide its own explanation of the origi of the platypus/ Now that would make for interesting "science". We would all know that sort of "kind" it is and whether it was on Noah's Ark.


It is quite simple. It was late afternoon and the Intelligent Designer was getting tired and muddled up a few bits.


He/she/it was squint;-)
Anonymous
 

Re: Truth in Science versus the poor old Platypus

Postby Anonymous » Fri Jul 11, 2008 4:00 pm

Roger Stanyard wrote:The daftest one I have seen recently is that because giraffes have long necks


Ohhh, you're going out on a limb :lol:
Anonymous
 

Re: Truth in Science versus the poor old Platypus

Postby Michael » Fri Jul 11, 2008 5:14 pm

Mike Brass wrote:
Roger Stanyard wrote:The daftest one I have seen recently is that because giraffes have long necks


Ohhh, you're going out on a limb :lol:


a neck is not a limb
Michael
 
Posts: 2786
Joined: Mon Oct 09, 2006 1:30 pm
Location: Lancaster

Postby Brian Jordan » Fri Jul 11, 2008 7:17 pm

What have platipi/uses got to do with the price of fish?
"PPSIMMONS is an amorphous mass of stupid" - Rationalwiki
User avatar
Brian Jordan
Forum Admin
 
Posts: 4216
Joined: Sat Oct 07, 2006 4:59 pm

Postby Brian Jordan » Fri Jul 11, 2008 7:26 pm

More to the point, have you seen their next moan - sorry, gloat? They're smirking about the cretinists' success in deluding legislators in Lousiana. I knew about this and regretted it but their revolting gloating could have been written by any of our several trolls. Probably was :-(
"PPSIMMONS is an amorphous mass of stupid" - Rationalwiki
User avatar
Brian Jordan
Forum Admin
 
Posts: 4216
Joined: Sat Oct 07, 2006 4:59 pm

Re: Truth in Science versus the poor old Platypus

Postby Anonymous » Fri Jul 11, 2008 9:05 pm

Michael wrote:
Mike Brass wrote:
Roger Stanyard wrote:The daftest one I have seen recently is that because giraffes have long necks


Ohhh, you're going out on a limb :lol:


a neck is not a limb


Hey hey hey, it's not often I can make such weak jokes these days!
Anonymous
 

Postby Roger Stanyard » Sat Jul 12, 2008 12:24 pm

Brian Jordan wrote:More to the point, have you seen their next moan - sorry, gloat? They're smirking about the cretinists' success in deluding legislators in Lousiana. I knew about this and regretted it but their revolting gloating could have been written by any of our several trolls. Probably was :-(


be careful. I suspect that Truth in Science's next scam will be to try to get cretinism into the classroom on the grounds of "academic freedom". My be is that they will also use the film Expelled as part of their campaign.

Perhaps we should post and imemdiate health warning.

BTW the New Scienctist (I have a copy besides me) looks to be deeply worried about the latest fundamentalist escapades in Louisiana. Me too. What is really worrying is that the governer appears to be reflecting publoc opinion in general. Those that migt oppose the move are too scared to say anything. In a sense I can't blame them. Look at the maliciousness behind the attacks on the BCSE and the attempts to get the police to investigate my "nefarious affairs".

BTW Brian, I don't consider McIntosh to be mad rather than bad. He was the spokesman for the Estelle Morris deception and plays a lead role in the decepetion of Truth in Science. He is connected to just about every creationist organisation going,
User avatar
Roger Stanyard
Forum Admin
 
Posts: 6162
Joined: Sat Oct 07, 2006 4:59 pm


Return to Science Only

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests