Evolution of Mammals Re-evaluated
AaxelB writes "A study described in the New York Times rethinks mammalian evolution. Specifically, that the mass extinction of the dinosaurs had relatively little impact on mammals and that the steps in mammals' evolution happened well before and long after the dinosaurs' death."
There is no theory of evolution, just a list of animals chuck norris has allowed to live....
Most sensible explanation
In other words, chicken tastes like dinosaur!
(In Creationist America and Lysenkoist Russia, dinosaurs taste like chicken!)
It's not so "cool" having to clean dinosaur droppings off my car, though.
Slow down, cowboy! It has been 4 hours since you last posted. You must wait another few hours.
But can they shoehorn it into the framework of a 6000 year old Earth?
Trolling is a art,
Speaking of misleading titles! I got all excited about your post's title, anticipating a link to some Miss Universe-type website. Instead, all I got was a one-sentence comment.
I'm calling you on this rediculous statement. Science is only as sure as they can prove. You'll hardly find a scientist who, under new evidence or studies, will say "nope, the way we used to believe is more correct, and i'll be damned if i take your new evidence into consideration!"
Sounds more like religion to me.
You two should stop fighting and realize that it was actually the flying spaghetti monster that created it all!
The original generic sig.
I've been partial to this alternative theory of Intelligent Design. http://www.venganza.org/about/open-letter/
"Rodents Of Unusual Size? I don't think they exist." http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0093779/quotes
A magic man done it! With "forcey forces" of coursey.
i
Duh...
Evolution:
x + 2 + 3 + 5 + 7 + y + 13 = 42
Creationism:
x^2 + 43 = 42
"Nobody has EVER made a fossil. NO fossils are being made anywhere today, especially by any slow, gradual process, sometimes imagined by evolutionists."
Two words: Snow Mummies.
"To prevent this, a dead body needs to be put in an environment that prevents all microorganisms from feeding on the remains and oxygen must be excluded."
Hm. Like drowning in tar?
"A sudden disastrous upheaval such as the Biblical flood could certainly account for fossils."
Yes. Because there are no waterborne microorganisms.
Read as "Naturally occuring semi-modern fossils"
"The unwarranted assumption (faith) is that such radioactive decay rates have never varied over the vast periods of time evolutionists need in order to make their assertions seem plausible."
In order for radioactive decay rates to change, there would need to be some fundamental changes in a number of unary (ie: they equal 1) quantum constants. These constants only exist to translate from conventional units of measurement into quantum units. I would submit that you need to show evidence to suggest that any QED constant has drifted by any small percent over the time we've known about them.
Seriously. Is it that you're trolling on purpose, or are you actually someone who is *just* educated enough to sound this stupid?
110100 1101000 1101000 1100110 0 1101111 1101000 1100011 1
Can it be because there is more selection pressure due to the dinosaurs?
If there is more selection pressure, more the chance of diverging to new species.
And when dinosaurs died out, the mammals had a field day.
rajmohan_h@yahoo.com