The fossils that rewrite the history of the dinosaurs: 230 million-year-old remains suggest their rise was 'more gradual' than thought

How many times is the bible going to be disproved before you come your senses??[CN]

请问你们要改多少次，圣经才能为之正确？

How many times is the bible going to be disproved before you come your senses??[CN]

请问你们要改多少次，圣经才能为之正确？

@usutu. Remember, it is better to remain quiet and be thought a fool, than to open your mouth and prove it.[CN]

@usutu. 记住，沉默不言被人当做傻瓜，还聊胜于你一开口就出错。

In contrast with creationists,who have never had it right once.[CN]

比起神灵论学家好的啦，他们就没对过。

Ever done a jigsaw puzzle? The big picture is correct even if the pieces are still to be found and correctly placed. The 'confusion', if you must put t that way, is in the small details. The reality and the truth of the big picture is not in question. There's not a piece that doesn't fit in the evolutionary picture. Meanwhile, creationism never was an alternative, except in the minds of idiots. Or the deliberately and the willfully ignorant. Don't be so bloody arrogant. Try now to understand how religion has got it so "wrong again...again....again...' (sic).[CN]

有玩过jigsaw字谜游戏吗？整的一幅图是正确无误的，但是小片的图案就要一个一个找，正确放置。如果你真的要这么解释的话，你的“疑惑”就要从小处着手了。整个圣经的大意是没有错的，毋庸置疑，没有半点不符合进化论。再说了，创造宇宙说除了傻逼脑子里这么想，其他人应该都不信。或者那种自以为是的文盲才信吧。不要这么无知好不好？现在你明白宗教为什么老是“又又又犯错了…”

You do not appear to realise that science, unlike religious dogma, is under constant scrutiny and revision.[CN]

看来你不明白，科学啊跟宗教教义不一样，是处于不断的审查和修正当中的。

Nobody has ever disproved the Bible to me, all I hear is opinions about why you want it to be wrong. Science is always revised because it can't get it right the first time round.[CN]

没人跟我说过圣经是谬论，我所听到的只是你想证明圣经是错的。科学一直都在自我修正，因为有些东西不能一开始就做对的。

"Nobody has ever disproved the Bible to me." What an utterly meaningless statement, Brian. All it means is that you have decided in advance that the Bible is true and will do anything to dogmatically defend that position. Tell us more about how there is no discrepancy between claims of talking snakes, donkeys and burning shrubbery, and the fact that snakes, donkeys and burning shrubbery can't talk. Tell us more about the discrepancies in the accounts of Jesus' alleged resurrection, and why completely different accounts aren't discrepancies? I'll make some popcorn. You follow this up with the equally pathetic "Science is always revised because it can't get it right the first time round"; a truly laughable demonstration of your need for cognitive closure. If my watch were to stop tomorrow, should I keep it because it tells the right time twice a day?[CN]

“没人能影响圣经在我心中的地位。“Brian, 你这生命也忒没意义了。这前提就是你确定圣经是正确的，无论怎样都会使劲去维护这个立场。给我们讲讲会讲话的蛇，驴和不会说话的燃烧草丛，它们之间怎么会没有区别？我来抛砖引玉吧。你说的这话都是以“科学不可能一蹴而就”这可怜的理论为基础。真是搞笑，暴露了你的认知闭合需要。如果我的钟表明天坏了，它一天只有两次时间是对的，我还要保留手表吗？

Nobody has been able to discredit the bible to me either. You look at scripture in a fleshly way. Because you deny the existence of God you can only reason in a fleshly way hence your inability to understand the talking snake and donkey, and the burning bush. Revelation 1:1 may help you to understand. A revelation by Jesus Christ, which God gave him, to show his slaves the things that must shortly take place. And he sent his angel and presented it in signs through him to his slave John, This scripture shows why your scoffing is irrelevant to a bible student. To understand many of the signs and symbols you need to have extensive bible knowledge.[CN]

没人可以说服我去不信上帝。你以一种不同的方式去看这手稿。因为你否认了上帝的存在，你就只能另辟蹊径，不然你无法搞懂，会说话的蛇和驴，以及燃烧的草丛。看了启示录1:1你就明白。这是耶稣的启示录（上帝赋予他的），告诉他的奴隶们，慢慢会发生的种种事情。他送走自己的守护神，以自己的名义讲解给他的奴隶John看。这文稿就表明，你的嘲讽根本没法影响到圣经的学徒。要读懂这些标志和象征符号，你还需要学习大把的圣经知识。

So you mean I have to believe without evidence, lilian, and only confirm my own bias? How utterly convincing.[CN]

所以你的意思是说，你无来由的就相信喽lilian，只是基于个人的偏见。没点说服力。

Anyone who has read the bibles and still believes that nonsense is an idiot!![CN]

读过圣经还去信的人都是大傻冒！

There is as much evidence for the bibles accuracy , as there is for your evolution theories. but the bible does not waver this way and that way. It is as stable now as it was when written, as the Dead Sea Scrolls revealed. Malachi 3:6[CN]

你的进化理论有多少依据，圣经就有多少证据。至少圣经可不会两边摆的。它著作之日一如既往的稳定，正如死海古卷所说。摘自《玛拉基书》 3:6

Phil. Read 1Corinthians 3:19. Bible available in jw.org[CN]

Phil. 读读《哥林多后书》 3章19节。圣经在jw.org上面有。

lilian - What's wrong with you? Quoting invented gibberish is not an argument.[CN]

Lilian – 你有毛病吧？尽引用些模棱两可的句子算什么评论？

lilian "There is as much evidence for the bibles accuracy , as there is for your evolution theories" - So says the person who had admitted to having no scientific knowledge at all. What unspeakable arrogance that displays! What desperation to believe at all and any cost! What a total willingness to trash intelligence, thought and any honesty! Then she goes on to quote made-up drivel as though it had some authority. Virtually all Biblical scholars (and anyone with a little knowledge) acknowledge the Bible has been heavily modified and changed, bits added, misinterpreted and many books left out until the final result suited the agenda of the time. It's NOT the word of god, it's propaganda and manipulation and terrible misunderstanding.[CN]

Lilian“你的进化理论有多少依据，圣经就有多少证据。” – 能说出这话的人就承认了自己没有科学知识。这是多么傲慢的言语啊。这是不惜一切代价也要去坚信圣经啊。简直就是真心实意的丢弃智慧，想法和诚实！然后她又引用一句编造的名言，好像真有权威似的。事实上所有的圣经学者（也包括稍有了解的那部分）都知道圣经是经过大量的修正和改缮的，很多内容有添加，有新解释。很多书都要淘汰掉，直至这个结果与当世的准则符合了。根本就不是上帝的寓言，而是政治洗脑和操纵，故意误导。

Peter, You evolutionists amaze me. You cannot see that you yourselves are guilty of the exact behavior that you condemn believers for. You are so intent on getting a word in that you speak a lot of drivel. There is as much evidence for the bibles accuracy , as there is for your evolution theories. but the bible does not waver this way and that way. It is as stable now as it was when written, as the Dead Sea Scrolls revealed. Malachi 3:6[CN]

彼得，你的进化论真是让我吃惊啊。你真的看不出，你自己就因谴责教徒这一确切行为就已犯下罪行。你太想说话了以致一开口就满口胡言。你的进化理论有多少依据，圣经就有多少证据。但是圣经可是不会两边摆的。它著作之日一如既往的稳定，正如死海古卷所说。摘自《玛拉基书》 3:6

You don't have the slightest understanding of how science works, do you?

Another loon who does not understand the meaning of 'scientific theory'!!! Just use a search engine. DOH!

A good scientific theory makes good predictions.

Let me guess you believe in a invisible sky giant creating everything......*sigh*

A theory is all the evidence supporting a conclusion; Not a fact. Evidence can change and therefore so does the theory. The evidence just mounts up to make a more compelling case so theories evolve. Stating the previous theory is a 'bad theory' is disingenuous to the researchers and the 'less' they had to work with at the time.

James O, pure science works by testing, observing and repeating; how can anyone check the evolution of man from apes using this method? How about life starting in a sterile environment without any external organisation? How can that be tested, observed and repeated? The great thing with Creation is that the creation account was written by an eye-witness: God. The evolution story cannot account for the information contained in DNA - this program for life that checks itself, interprets itself and reproduces itself - but since God, "The Word", is the Designer and Creator, He is the provider of this code. And since we are moral creatures with God as our Creator, we are answerable to Him.

"pure science works by testing, observing and repeating; how can anyone check the evolution of man from apes?" By 1) knowing what a human is. 2) knowing what an ape is 3) the simple observation that humans are apes. Right now. At this very moment. Or, if you prefer, the evolution of humans is 'variation within the ape kind'. It would seem that Nigelsquare does not know what the word "repeatable" means in the context of science.

^^^haha. No words for these indoctrinated fools! So "God", a invisible giant wrote it down did he? Was that in his own language or did he have to wait for humans to earn to communicate through what we now call language? Why doesn't he comment on here or bother at all to show his existance like write "its God Im watching you all" in 200ft letters so satellites pick it up? Maybe, just maybe this "God" is a figment of your imagination much like Hogworts, Gandalf and Spiderman.

Nicely put, Udonnoodles. If God has eyes required to witness magic fruit, talking donkeys, seven-headed dragons and virgin births and hands required to write about said events, then who created the "information contained" in the DNA that God is composed of. Nigelsquare claims to have answered questions like this "numerous times" (despite never having done so) so we can look forward to having this most pressing of issues swiftly addressed.

Why does Nigel sit so easy in his delusion? I fear he is quite sick...

Hey Tuna . I thought you didn't know what a kind is. If you don't know what a kind is then you cannot use it in a debate. Now if this comes up under the name of null ignore that because it was posted by your ' thorn in the flesh 'Lilian

Lilian, I was inferring a definition of what a "kind" is from some of Nigelsquare's previous postings (which of course have been contradicted by other Nigelsquare postings), in a bid to help confused of Cardiff achieve a level of scientific understanding one might expect from a moderately intelligent child. Of course such efforts are futile, as is evident from the fact that Nigelsquare can only provide examples of "kinds" and not a clear definition of what a kind is, and because he makes it up as he goes along, having variously described $ub-species and domains as "kinds". The bible is actually very clear - if two organisms can reproduce ("bring forth"), they are of the same "kind" - if they cannot bring forth they are different kinds. In other words, "kind" is another word for species. Nigelsquare appears to think he knows better than the authors of the bible on this, but any other definition involves accepting the theory of evolution and contradicts the creation account of Genesis 1.

Lilian, I was inferring a definition of what a "kind" is from some of Nigelsquare's previous postings (which of course have been contradicted by other Nigelsquare postings), in a bid to help confused of Cardiff achieve a level of scientific understanding one might expect from a moderately intelligent child. Of course such efforts are in vain, as is evident from the fact that Nigelsquare can only provide examples of "kinds" and not a clear definition of what a kind is, and because he makes it up as he goes along, having variously described su b-species and domains as "kinds". The bible is actually very clear - if two animals can reproduce ("bring forth"), they are of the same "kind" - if they cannot bring forth they are different kinds. In other words, "kind" is another word for species. Nigelsquare appears to think he knows better than the authors of the bible on this, but any other definition involves accepting the theory of evolution and contradicts the creation account of Genesis 1.

My comments are also coming up as "null"... why is that? Lillian, what have you done to my account?

To Tuna, from Lilian I think you have been taking a sneaky peep at jw.org. I kept telling you that a kind is determined by ability to produce offspring of the same kind. Next step is to introduce an ape to womankind. The ape will be completely disinterested. unless she is carrying a bunch of bananas

Apes are not a species, lilian - they are a collection of many species. An ape is a gill-less, organic RNA/DNA protein-based, metabolic, metazoic, nucleic, diploid, bilaterally-symmetrical, endothermic, digestive, tryploblast, opisthokont, deuterostome coelemate with a spinal chord and 12 cranial nerves connecting to a limbic system in an enlarged cerebral cortex with a reduced olfactory region inside a jawed-skull with specialised teeth including canines and premolars, forward-oriented fully-enclosed optical orbits, and a single temporal fenestra, attached to a vertebrate hind-leg dominant tetrapoidal skeleton with a sacral pelvis, clavical, wrist and ankle bones; and having lungs, tear ducts, body-wide hair follicles, lactal mammaries, opposable thumbs, and keratinised dermis with chitinous nails on all five digits on all four extremities, an embryonic development in amniotic fluid leading to a placental birth by menstral cycle ...

... with opposable halluxes, flattened fingernails, uniquely distinctive fingerprints, brachiating shoulders, reduced olfactory sensitivity, an inability to synthesise vitamins C or D3, an oversized brain, an ability to understand the meaning of words, relatively sparse fur and a reduced or absent baculum. Any organism which possesses these characteristics is an ape. Which one of the many characteristics listed above do not apply to humans?

Tuna Ydych chi'n ei chael nad ydych yn cael eu gwahodd i nifer o bartïon.

I repeat,...Tuna does love to show off his vocabulary. He also uses the Anglo Saxon vernacular when he gets really annoyed, or when you hit a nerve.

Palaeontologists come up with these huge ages with no evidence of them.

There is masses of evidence. Start with the Nat Hist Museum in London, then off to the library.

The flu virus evolves every year as do bacteria continually. But I suppose you are immune.

A flue virus isn't quite an animal species is it. Deliberately blind without looking.

Dinosaurs are not lizards. And by merely acknowledging the existence of dinosaurs and lizard, has accepted the evidence of evolution! Self-refuting arguments are always the funniest!

Scientists can be wrong about many things, just as non-scientists can be wrong about many things. However, they are predominately correct about most things (and can demonstrate that for you) than they are wrong. One of the wonderful aspects of science is its ability to change as new information comes available.It is unfortunate that religion cannot do the same.

...and scientist admit they are wrong and are willing to modify their stance and new evidence and techniques are found. Unlike the other lot....

crazyworld - In reply - [1] Dr Mary Schweitzer found keratin and some other proteins preserved in ancient dinosaur bone. Later experiment found that this was due to very thick bone and the high concentration of iron in the blood. The matter was fully studied by independent workers, reported and is fully understood. The creationist liars tell you otherwise. [2] "Carbon dating" is never used to date fossils - (a) because the method is limited to less that 50k yrs and (b) It does not work on mineralised specimens (like fossils). However, the creationist liar Dr Snelling (AiG) used it on ammonite beds in California, knowing it would give wrong results but that people like you are too ill-educated to know that he is lying you. This is all reported in the scientific Press and can be checked on-line - assuming you can read and understand a scientific paper.

EB, facts and verifiable data? Whatever next? I prefer my loony conspiracy websites and the bible.

National Geographic says different and all fossils tested came up with the same result.

Crazyworld appears not to know what the word "mineralised" means.

You need to check your facts about carbon 14, the uneducated educated hey !

EB you made me smile, I love how such educated people have a pathetic mindset and self belief. I can only hope your an only child who has never bred...

crazyworld - You are clearly resentful of people who have an education; but your ignorance isn't their fault, is it? It might not be your fault either, come to that; but your childish response to being given information about a subject you've become acquainted with only from National Geographic is just stupid. Have you thought to check whether its information about carbon dating might be wrong, if it was indeed your source? That might have been a more grown-up thing to do if only to be able to challenge EB with facts, were he to be mistaken. It would certainly have been more grown-up as well as more civilised than to insult him so grossly. JCP.

Ad hominem arguments eh, crazyworld. Always the best. You tell us to "check your facts about carbon 14," If a fossil has been mineralised, then THERE IS NO CARBON 14 PRESENT! Date anything older than 60 thousand years, and you get the same result. Fossils are generally dated by stratigraphy. If a more specific date is required, then alternative methods using isotopes with longer half-lives would be used - for example, fission track dating in the case of dinosaur fossils. Are you familiar with the term "Dunning-Kruger effect"? I suspect many of your acquaintances are.

^^^ hahahaahahhaa

There is carbon 14 in the dinosaur bones. Age is 20,000 to 40,000 years old.

Ralpha1961 -- You're out of your depth again.

Can't help it if the truth hurts. Funny how liberal science will spend hundreds of millions of dollars to find life on a barren, desolate lifeless planet like Mars but reject traces of life in, of all things, dinosaur bones.

Ralpha1961 - No, you're still struggling. There's no doubt about it: the paddling pool is the place for you.

Goodness knows how many times Ralph the liar has been corrected on his misrepresentation of the MOR 1125 discovery. Unfortunately for him, he has just accepted that an extremely large and diverse clade of organisms all descend from a common ancestor. Creationists have tried to claim that common descent does occur, but that it is restricted to "micro evolution" or "variation within a kind" (whatever a "kind" is supposed to be). By merely accepting that there is such a thing as a dinosaur, Ralph the liar is accepting their evolutionary relationship. If his explanation is that this relationship between sauropods, theropods, ceratopsids, etc. is just variation within the dinosaur "kind", then we can observe the same relationship between monotremes, marsupials and placentals (including humans) and infer that their evolution is just variation within the mammal "kind". Thus, Ralph the liar has accepted the theory of evolution and rejected the creation account of Genesis!

Too stupid for science! Try religion :D

More interestingly if the findings were accurate there was also humanoids among dinosaurs. Some trex crap had humanoid bones in it.

Not true, Ash - ¿Humanoid Collarbone Exposed as Dolphin¿s Rib,¿ New Scientist, April 28

And stop the idiotic 'humans came from apes' routine - that is not what the theory of evolution says.

An ape is just a mammal that has (among other things) nipples, brachiating shoulder joints and no tail. So we can infer that at least one of the following statements is true: 1) Imbloodywellannoyed has no nipples. 2) Imbloodywellannoyed's shoulder joints do not rotate. 3) Imbloodywellannoyed has a tail. While I applaud his honesty and wish him well in his travails, I dare say the DM comments section is not the best place for this type of confession. Incidentally, the "if we came from apes, why are there still apes?" chestnut is on the Answers in Genesis list of arguments not to use against the educated.

I love the way Darwinists are quite happy to see the ape to human t-shirts, school book drawings, etc. but whenever challenged, they deny they ever said it.

Humans didn't descend from apes. Apes and humans descended from a common ancestor.

Not true actually, Wibble. What you should have said is that "THE OTHER apes and humans descended from a common ancestor." We know this because humans are apes right now. We are also hominoidea, catarrhini, simiiformes, haplorrhini, pr!m@tes, pr!m@tomorpha, euarchonta, euarchontoglires, boreoeutherians, eutherians, theriiformes, mammals, amniotes, tetrapods, vertebrates, chordates, animals and eukaryotes.

Tuna does love to show off his vocabulary. He also uses the Anglo Saxon vernacular when he gets really annoyed, or when you hit a nerve.

Made by whom, mate?

Yes, coz on day 7 the almighty needed a rest - and hasn't returned since. Bit like my builder....

Rudolf Hucker. Read Hebrews 4: 1----11 Various bibles available in jw.org. Click on scripture to obtain much information, Then comment

Read a real book, not a children's fairytale that religious extremists are using as an alternative to reality!

Randy Priest. Who asked for your opinion. My post was for Rudolf Hucker.

What happened to Null? Has he become extinct? Shame if he has.

Null, that is BS, she is one of your MANY fake personalities, we can see years of comments made by you that claim you are every different possibillty of person and many different nationalities, as well as many ages and both sexes.

Man created god

...a women came uo with a far fetched story for a affair she had. She had no idea this would lead to a whole new religion and such suffering.

God gave man original sin and then he drowned everyone for sinning and then he sent himself down to earth so he could kill himself as a sacrifice to himself for the sin he gave us. Yes Ron, it makes perfect sense...

The Tempter, Satan is the originator of sin. Jesus came down to prove the Divinity and to enter Paradise and Hades to prove His Divinity to them. Today we have no excuse for our sin.

And the American Christians.

How is my name NULL and not what it should be???? Null, what did you do to my login?

All that illustrates, is the power of indoctrination.

Science works. If someone is choking you have two choices the Heimlich maneuver or praying. What would you do??

David---me too. Those religious people that know everything. They KNOW where it all started, where we all came from and where the animals started. All from a few bronze age stories. Amazing. Pity that science has only "perhaps" and "maybe" because science will always be able to change its position to fit new evidence. But you are quite right---we would all be rich if we had a pound each time a religion said it had all the answers.

I know for sure ...... this is what the last remnants of Tim not nice but Dim,s liberal party will look like when they defy the will of the leavers in the next election

We eat small dinosaurs today, but call them chickens.

DM is owned by putin and is probably the ones doing the hacking, democrats don't stiffle freedoms only the right-wing does that.

LOL.