Triceratops 'never really existed but was just a young version of
another dinosaur'
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-1299666/Triceratops-really-existed.html
or
http://tinyurl.com/28tbfy8
___
On 03/08/2010, at 8:24 PM, Ronn! Blankenship wrote:
Triceratops 'never really existed but was just a young version of another
dinosaur'
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-1299666/Triceratops-really-existed.html
Or more precisely, it's been discovered that _Torosaurus_ has been
Charlie Bell wrote:
But thanks, it's a great example of science at work. It's also
becoming common - lots of what were thought to be different species
are becoming merged as the numbers of specimens increases. What
we're learning is that some dinosaurs had some pretty impressive
On 03/08/2010, at 10:35 PM, Alberto Monteiro wrote:
Charlie Bell wrote:
But thanks, it's a great example of science at work. It's also
becoming common - lots of what were thought to be different species
are becoming merged as the numbers of specimens increases. What
we're learning is
On Tue, Aug 3, 2010 at 5:35 AM, Alberto Monteiro albm...@centroin.com.brwrote:
There can't be too many different species, Noah's Ark wasn't
big enough to carry them all!
What, evolution stopped with the Ark?
As long as we're on that subject, it dawned on me a while ago that the
trouble I
On 3 Aug 2010, at 16:10, Nick Arnett wrote:
On Tue, Aug 3, 2010 at 5:35 AM, Alberto Monteiro albm...@centroin.com.br
wrote:
There can't be too many different species, Noah's Ark wasn't
big enough to carry them all!
What, evolution stopped with the Ark?
As long as we're on that
On Tue, Aug 3, 2010 at 8:29 AM, William T Goodall w...@wtgab.demon.co.ukwrote:
...
When presented with the statement “human beings, as we know them today,
developed from earlier species of animals,” just 45 percent of respondents
indicated “true.” Compare this figure with the affirmative
On Aug 3, 2010, at 10:33 AM, Nick Arnett wrote:
On Tue, Aug 3, 2010 at 8:29 AM, William T Goodall w...@wtgab.demon.co.uk
wrote:
...
When presented with the statement “human beings, as we know them
today, developed from earlier species of animals,” just 45 percent
of respondents indicated
_
From: brin-l-boun...@mccmedia.com [mailto:brin-l-boun...@mccmedia.com] On
Behalf Of Nick Arnett
Sent: Tuesday, August 03, 2010 10:34 AM
To: Killer Bs (David Brin et al) Discussion
Subject: Re: First Pluto is not a planet, and now . . . .
It is bad luck to be superstitious!
Nick Arnett wrote:
There can't be too many different species, Noah's Ark wasn't
big enough to carry them all!
What, evolution stopped with the Ark?
As long as we're on that subject, it dawned on me a while ago
that the trouble I have with creationists is that they believe
in a God
On Aug 3, 2010, at 10:10 AM, Nick Arnett wrote:
As long as we're on that subject, it dawned on me a while ago that
the trouble I have with creationists is that they believe in a God
who is too stupid to have created evolution.
They also believe in a god who loves them so much that he'll
On Aug 3, 2010, at 10:13 AM, Alberto Monteiro wrote:
Nick Arnett wrote:
There can't be too many different species, Noah's Ark wasn't
big enough to carry them all!
What, evolution stopped with the Ark?
As long as we're on that subject, it dawned on me a while ago
that the trouble I have
The idea that Christianity or Judaism believe that the devil is
a separate but (thankfully, not quite) equal power to God is
nonsense: it goes against the whole idea of monotheism. You can
accept or not accept the monotheistic God of Judeo-Christianity
as you see fit, but you can't accept it
On Aug 3, 2010, at 12:48 PM, Dave Land wrote:
The idea that Christianity or Judaism believe that the devil is
a separate but (thankfully, not quite) equal power to God is
nonsense: it goes against the whole idea of monotheism. You can
accept or not accept the monotheistic God of
On 3 Aug 2010, at 19:35, Bruce Bostwick wrote:
On Aug 3, 2010, at 12:48 PM, Dave Land wrote:
The idea that Christianity or Judaism believe that the devil is
a separate but (thankfully, not quite) equal power to God is
nonsense: it goes against the whole idea of monotheism. You can
accept
On Aug 3, 2010, at 4:00 PM, William T Goodall wrote:
On 3 Aug 2010, at 19:35, Bruce Bostwick wrote:
On Aug 3, 2010, at 12:48 PM, Dave Land wrote:
The idea that Christianity or Judaism believe that the devil is
a separate but (thankfully, not quite) equal power to God is
nonsense: it goes
On 04/08/2010, at 3:48 AM, Dave Land wrote:
Then again, there's the Jewish tradition that The Satan isn't
an embodiment of pure evil or some bad dude in red pajamas with a
goatee and a pitchfork, but is, in fact, the prosecuting angel,
whose role is to find out whether believers are truly
On Aug 3, 2010, at 3:49 PM, Charlie Bell wrote:
On 04/08/2010, at 3:48 AM, Dave Land wrote:
Then again, there's the Jewish tradition that The Satan isn't
an embodiment of pure evil or some bad dude in red pajamas with a
goatee and a pitchfork, but is, in fact, the prosecuting angel,
whose
So God needs to use entrapment?
Heh. I just report 'em. I don't make 'em up. This is the sort of
thing that makes me a very liberal Christian.
In defense of the Jews of about 400 BCE to 200 BCE their theology was
actually a bit different than the characterization of it by folks who
haven't
19 matches
Mail list logo
