37 messages in 17 discussions
Latest Nov-16 by Cstar1
230 messages in 68 discussions
Latest 12/3/17 by Kid (Kidmagnet)
Latest Nov-14 by Cstar1
Latest Nov-5 by Kid (Kidmagnet)
Latest Nov-5 by Kid (Kidmagnet)
Latest Oct-21 by Cstar1
20 messages in 9 discussions
Latest Oct-23 by SHERPAT1
151 messages in 30 discussions
31 messages in 14 discussions
11 messages in 3 discussions
52 messages in 19 discussions
19 messages in 5 discussions
32 messages in 12 discussions
Thanks for providing this link. There is division among the scientists about this topic. I have been researching evolution on the internet for the past 3 years and there doesn't seem to be a consensus. After reading the BBC News report, I immediately went to the pros and cons and discovered this:
What I don't like about this debate is that the two sides are so close-minded. For example, the link I provided is from the creationist side of things; albeit the article claims the conclusion comes from an evolutionist. On the flip side, one in which we were schooled forever, the utter non-acceptance is baffling. It seems the scientists tend to talk past each other. Both claim to have their own facts.
Stuck in the middle. The beauty of the creation of birds is the wonder of it all.
Was that suppose to be a whole link? It leads only to the main site.
The beauty of science is, it is not finite. It best answers the "question" asked at that moment in time with the information available. And sometimes that answer is, we do not know. When more information is discovered the facts can change proving a previous theory incorrect. It's the goal of science to ask and answer questions, and never stop.
It was supposed to be, but the gist of the post was pretty much your reply. I spend way too much time watching videos on both sides of the topic. By the way, I discovered your forum by the promotion featured On Delphi Forums. In the grand scheme of things, we are privileged to experience the wonder of it all. How it all came to be is only material to which side one is on.
I was able to search the link once again. Here is the headline and main bullet points. Thank you for sharing your joy with the community.
I have no idea why things are so debated lol. My life is not going to change because someone comes u with new evidence to support either theory. Now if I were to wake up one morning with the ability to fly... THAT would be news I'd want to know about! lol
By the way, I discovered your forum by the promotion featured On Delphi Forums.
Great! Thanks for the feed back. This forum was originally set up to showcase my collection of bird photos. Sadly I had hosted them on Photobucket and they are all kaput. I'm in the process of fixing that but it's slow going lol.
If you check out the Live Story (see lefthand coloum for the link to Stories- Live Now) I update that every day or so and there is always pretty photos I find on Twitter and the occasional interesting article.
I always thought the two-legged dinosaurs were ancestors of birds (T-Rex, raptor ...), while the four-legged were more like reptiles. The ancestors of monkeys, men and all were a different creature than either.
dinosaurs into birds.
??? Birds and dinosaurs had a common ancestor way back further in time. Birds did not evolve "from" dinosaurs any more than monkeys and humans did.
Or perhaps all three evolved separately from different slime?
It is hard to fathom that everything evolved from a rock; even future rocks. As I typed, I have been heavily involved with internet research for the past 3 years. It's great to be retired and have an open mind. Whether it is true or not, I watched a most awe inspiring video the other night on the universe. With today's technology and ability to create CGI, photo shop, etc., it is very difficult to believe one's eyes these days.
The reason that I type that is a column by Marilyn Van Savant (?) from Parade magazine a year or so ago. Forgive me if I misspelled her name. She wrote that these distant photos come in as black & white and that artists apply the colorization as they envision them. If that is true; dang. Apparently, therefore, this awesome video may be doing the same thing. If so; dang.
I was watching an evolutionist decry creationism the other day. He made a statement that took these past 3 years to finally sink in. Paraphrasing, he stated that he has yet to see an anti-evolutionist not be a creationist. Upon hearing that, I did a double take and uttered, "duh!" I'm pretty sure that there can't be anything in-between, but I could be wrong.
I won't be pretentious and direct you to the video at this time. The presenter is a former atheist and evolutionist, but his background as a military space advisor has convinced him the science proves otherwise. He makes a great case if one believes in the laws of physics, et. al. At times, logic can be a hindrance.
Being a bird brain, and I mean that is the most kind way since this refers to the name of this forum, which did come first; the chicken or the egg? The funny part is that this former military presenter applied the same logic to star formation. He implied that one needs a star to form a star. Is retrospect, I may have been better off just moving on those three years ago. Nah, it has been an exciting informative ride.
Thank you for taking the time with me. Here's hoping your forum remains a success and Merry Christmas, Keith.
I don't really know too much about it. We found a bird once while on an outing and one of the kids (age 4) told people we'd found a dinosaur. I thought he was just pulling people's legs but then he told me birds had evolved from dinos and I did just enough research to see he had not made it up on the spot.