"stu...."...guess we've finished talking about....."
I believe you were talking about phylogeny in relation to avian/dino.
perhaps you want to talk about giraffes neck nerves instead?
maybe I will look that up too. it might be another evolutionary assumption!"

Pete, I think you're trying it on mate. I was addressing the points you made in your previous post, which I'm guessing you're fully aware of. Your arguments are disingenuous and dishonest and often insulting, but if you're only about avoiding the issue and winding me up then fine. You might fool some of the more gullible religious types on this site, but then their tacit acceptance of you as some sort of 'good bloke' despite a penchant for insulting honest working scientists doesn't reflect too well on them either. I've debated here as someone with a genuine interest and passion for what I do, not to denigrate others. You've been a good teacher in one sense Pete, but I'm getting very busy studying dinosaurs.

One more thing. If you want to debate science you need to put some genuine effort into finding out what you're talking about. Do you know if you creationist website is lying to you Rob's comments and excellent link (prediction: you will address none of the points raised in that link in any meaningful way) show, the subject demands some research if you wish to dentate it. You must read peer-reviewed papers to get a handle on any of these subjects, and without putting that effort in you're debating from a position of ignorance. You don't have to agree with their methodology or conclusions but you do have to say why they are wrong and why. This is the bread and butter of science, and all scientists are avid readers of peer-reviewed papers.

I'm guessing you won't, but then I'm also guessing you're here to wind people up. Best of luck.


Everyone else: This month's Fortean Times has an interesting article but a chap who apparently teaches ancient Hebrew and argues the translation of Genesis is deeply flawed and the myth of Noah has been utterly misunderstood. I don't know of the veracity of his argument or his authority to speak on such matters, but it's with a cursory glance if nothing else, as the actual story is a rather delightful myth.