Moderator: Moderators
MisterGordons wrote:The meat machine known as Ken Ham wrote a blog post. It was not a scientific article nor did Ham pretend that it was so. The meat machine known as Ashley Haworth-Roberts fallaciously criticized it and used a generalization against Ken Ham and Answers in Genesis. Let Ashley Haworth-Roberts criticize and show where the science is erroneous in this article since he pretends to be an expert in so many fields. https://answersingenesis.org/biology/mi ... d-eukarya/
a_haworthroberts wrote:Ham was discussing scientific topics. "Let Ashley Haworth-Roberts criticize and show where the science is erroneous in this article". I already did, troll.
MisterGordons wrote:a_haworthroberts wrote:Ham was discussing scientific topics. "Let Ashley Haworth-Roberts criticize and show where the science is erroneous in this article". I already did, troll.
Ashley Haworth-Roberts did not discuss the article I linked.
a_haworthroberts wrote:https://www.facebook.com/aigkenham/
"Just another example of the evolving story of evolution. Almost daily evolutionists are changing their ideas--after all, it's just a made-up story about the past so they can change it whenever they want--and they do--and they call it science!
https://phys.org/news/2018-02-colonized ... rlier.html"
What an appalling pathologically lying cultist science hating bigot this man is. Makes me feel sick in the stomach - if I was still a Christian I am sure I would feel exactly the same.
Details of a wide-ranging theory get altered following further investigations. Which is what happens sometimes with science.
Besides this lying bigot frequently tries to have it both ways:
https://answersingenesis.org/blogs/ken- ... -religion/
"I urge Christians to become more vocal regarding calling evolution and millions of years what they really are (and to undo secularist brainwashing). Evolution and millions of years—concepts held to with ardor and blind faith—are a religion—and this religion is being imposed on kids. Secularist propaganda has brainwashed millions of kids in evolution, but it's an anti-God religion to justify people being their own gods!"
No the person with the unchanging inflexible dogmatic RELIGION is Ken Ham. The theory of evolution is NOT an unchanging inflexible dogmatic 'religion'. A typical dictionary definition of religion being "the belief in and worship of a superhuman controlling power, especially a personal God or gods" or "a particular system of faith and worship".
He's an appalling hypocrite. "I love science!" No - you hate science. You FALSELY call it a 'religion' - and then FALSELY allege that it is being significantly changed 'almost daily'. Ken Ham is a LIAR.
And he is not Christianity's spokesperson.
a_haworthroberts wrote:https://sciencetrends.com/vegaviidae-group-modern-birds-survived-dinosaur-extinction/
https://answersingenesis.org/blogs/ken- ... st-a-duck/
"A recent article highlighted the discovery of a “duck-relative” (otherwise known as a duck) [no], which they call a “modern bird,” [yes ie it was not toothed unlike most from the Cretaceous era] from the supposed “Age of Dinosaurs,” [no 'supposed' just actual] according to the evolutionary timeline.
"This duck group supposedly survived the dinosaur extinction event some 65 million years ago and is allegedly “the first documented case of a group of birds surviving such extinction.”" [That's what the evidence shows.] "But how could dinosaurs have evolved into birds if we have examples of modern birds in the very same layers as dinosaurs?" [Easily since there were hundreds of species of dinosaurs - though not all of them contemporaneous with each other - through an era lasting more than 150 million years, and (as AiG accept) some birds, species that are now long extinct, were already around too towards the end of that era.] Ham's bold type sentence is wilful misdirection.
This article also repeats Ken Ham 'information' from earlier this month that has recently been mostly debunked by a Christian palaeontologist blogger. Namely: "And, contrary to what the article states, these ducks are certainly not the only example [that article never said they were it said neornithes were "very scarce and patchy" and then suggested that Vegaviidae was "the first group of modern birds from the Mesozoic" (to survive the extinction event - and note the word 'group')] of modern birds buried with dinosaurs. We find fossilized parrots, albatrosses, loons, owls, flamingos, penguins, sandpipers, and more buried in the same layers as dinosaurs. And one evolutionary researcher claimed that such evidence supports the idea that “most or all of the major modern bird groups were present in the Cretaceous” (a so-called “dinosaur layer”). While these fossils are rarely displayed in museums, they exist and are a serious challenge to the evolutionary timeline."
See: https://answersingenesis.org/blogs/ken- ... just-bird/
"But the author of the article calls these birds “bird-like dinosaurs” because of the supposed evolutionary connection between dinosaurs and birds (even though modern and now-extinct birds lived at the same time as the dinosaurs, including parrots, loons, owls, flamingos, and more)."
And then: https://thenaturalhistorian.com/2018/02 ... sil-birds/
"But this claim is just wrong and it is wrong in multiple ways. First, for most of the birds mentioned, no such fossils exist. Second, the term “modern” is undefined but 99% of AiG’s readers will take this to mean that a “modern” parrot from the era of dinosaurs is a parrot similar to one alive today but whose bones are found mixed with dinosaur-bearing rocks.
So, are there fossils of “modern” parrots, loons, owls and flamingos found in dinosaur-era rocks? The short answer – NO! But are there fossils in dinosaur-bearing rocks of ancestral parrots and flamingos that are recognizable as belonging to those families or “kinds” as Ken Ham might want to call them or may be thinking in his “modern” term? The answer is still NO! There aren’t even any fossils that can be definitely identified as belonging to these families that are found with dinosaurs." [However Ken Ham does appear to have shown in his latest blog post that there were some ancestral parrots around in the Cretaceous.]
A "serious challenge to the evolutionary timeline" is not the same thing as a serious challenge to the theory of evolution.
And Ham hasn't finished:
"The layers don’t represent eons of evolutionary time—they most likely represent ecosystems successively buried by rising floodwaters." Total garbage. How could more than one ecosystem be found in a single location in the space of one year (a 'flood year' indeed)? Total nonsense. Real science - and real deep time - does explain what is observed.
"To learn more about fossils of so-called “modern” animals, check out Living Fossils, an excellent book by Dr. Carl Werner. You’ll be shocked by what’s found in the fossil record that you never knew about!
Oh, and ducks have always been—well—ducks!"
Said the Ayatollah of Misinformation.
Actually these Vegaviidae birds may have been more loons than ducks. Remind you of anyone? From the article Ham tries to ridicule:
"Records of Modern birds (Neornithes) from the Age of Dinosaurs or Mesozoic Era, are very scarce and patchy. Most specimens are represented by isolated bones or strongly incomplete skeletons. This contrast with toothed birds, which are widely represented and known by abundant skeletons." Toothed birds, which appeared earlier in Earth history, having now gone extinct. We are left with 'modern' birds (even if some of them had ancient origins).
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vegaviidae
Ken Ham is anti-science. His articles are often breath-takingly simplistic and stupid.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28988276
PS at 12.44 am
That parrot fossil has now been mentioned in comments at the Naturalis Historia blog.
Return to Conversations with Creationists
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 7 guests