Evolution: An Objective Look

O: Arguing with Another PHD Biologist

I always like to save my debates with highly educated evolutionauts.  They don’t fare any better than the run of the mill evolutionauts.  They start out thinking they are going to chew me up and spit me out.  Then the frustration starts creeping in, the name calling, the…..drooling. Here is a debate with a guy named SanRafaelSwell who says he is a PHD biologist and ecologist.  So he should KILL me.  But of course he runs into trouble, and falters.  Just like anyone who is defending a fable.

SanRafaelSwell ·  The owner of this channel is certainly NOT a biologist. (I never claimed to be.)

stevebee92653: The writer of this comment certainly has nothing of interest to say. What a complete bore you are. I can’t imagine what kinds of thoughts course through your head. Fortunately for me.

SanRafaelSwell: Some non-avian Theropods were tiny. Only 2 or 3 pounds. Plenty of ancient birds had teeth (Ichtyornis, Hesperornis to name two). And there are plenty of “signs of wing evolution”. In fact there is a very well layed out sequence of both wing and feather development found within Coelurosauria and more specifically with in Maniraptora.  (This guy has been fooled.  Check the pix below for Coelurosauria and Maniraptora.  Think these guys were on the way to becoming fliers?  Did an artist add the trailing “feathers”?  Are these wings?  Or wings to be?  He actually thinks these are good examples of wing evolution?  So sad.) This video is full of lies and misinformation.

stevebee92653: I bet those 2 or 3 pounders are the hummingbirds! Whattya think? The mid-sized theropods evolved into chickens, and turkeys. And Trex evolved into emus and ostriches? I hope I’m right on this one. I sure don’t want you thinking my stuff is full of lies.  (Just funnin’ of course; and knowing he won’t pick that up.  Evolutionauts are uber-serious at all times.)

SanRafaelSwell: Hummingbirds don’t weigh pounds, they weigh grams. (They don’t weigh pounds? Like not .003 pounds?  This guy is a PHD?) Compsognathus was a very small theropod. Ornitholestes was also small. Coelophysis is yet another example. No, I don’t think mid sized theropods turned into chickens and turkeys and T. rex gave rise to ostriches and emus. (As I said, he has no idea his chain is being pulled. Typical.) Birds are dinosaurs by definition however. (Birds are dinosaurs? I bet some ev-illusionist said that, and everyone worshipped.)  They posses every single defining characteristic of Dinosauria. They are dinosaurs, end of story. (You mean I can’t even argue?)

stevebee92653: I know you’re joking. Every single defining characteristic? Wow. Amazing what evolution can do to people’s common sense and skepticism. About the theropods: I WAS kidding. You: a humorless gullible believer. End of story.

SanRafaelSwell: Yes, every single defining characteristic. Not joking, this is a fact of reality. Hope your delusions serve you well.

stevebee92653: (1) Put a picture of a hummingbird and woodpecker next to a picture of a theropod

(2) Open your eyes wide….wider….WIDER!

(3) Take a good look. Think.

(4) Contrast and compare the hummingbird and woodpecker with the theropod

(5) Have a good laugh at yourself for being so gullible

SanRafaelSwell: Very well, you obviously don’t know the defining characteristics of Dinosauria so I’ll list the major ones and I’d like you to cite which ones birds lack. Then we can move on to the minor ones. If you really are a biologist you will understand these.

1.absence of a postfrontal bone

2.an elongate deltopectoral crest

3.three or fewer phalanges in the fourth digit of the manus

4.three or more sacral vertebrae

5.a perforated acetabulum

6.a ball-like femoral head

7.a cnemial crest on the tibia

8.a well-developed ascending process on the astragalus that fits on the anterior face of the tibia

so, which one/s of these do birds lack?

stevebee92653 Which do birds lack? The inability to fly; those immense jaws and sharp teeth; fully movable femurs and visible knees; gigantic tails; those eensy teeensy weensy arms that couldn’t even clap…..never mind. You didn’t open your eyes WIDE like I told you to.

SanRafaelSwell: You should pay attention, I mentioned teeth and tails. T. rex could curl 400 lbs. in one arm. The arms were not useless though you seem to imply it. Microraptor was a dinosaur (with feathers) and it flew. Kiwis and ostriches are birds and they can’t fly. You don’t know what you are talking about. Flight is NOT a defining characteristic of birds. You didn’t list any of the characteristics that birds lack. You are no biologist and my list was surely gibberish to you.

stevebee92653 I probably had more biology than you will ever have. And your list IS gibberish. You described it perfectly. So are your beliefs. The ones you “accepted”.

Curl 400 lbs? I wonder if a hummingbird can curl 400 lbs. Ever give it a try? Did you actually see the curl take place? Flight ISN’T a defining characteristic of birds? Which professor told you that one? Why did you believe what he said? Do you always believe what anyone tells you as long as it’s pro evo? Do you think?

SanRafaelSwell: I have my PhD in Evolution, Ecology and Organismal Biology from the University of Utah. (Well, he did beat me on the education thing.  Not the gullible/common sense quotient thought.) My dissertation is called “The Effects of Over-grazing on Cryptobiotic Soil Populations of the San Rafael Swell.” (That must have  been a very interesting paper for his trainer to read!)  Sorry, won’t give you my name here. My list was gibberish to you because you aren’t a biologist though you claimed to be in the comments here. That makes you a liar.  (Ah, another name calling by this PHD biologist.)  Flight is NOT a defining characteristic of birds otherwise the Kiwi and Ostrich wouldn’t be birds but they are. (Which is why they call the Kiwi and Ostrich “flightless birds”.  These are rare exceptions to the obvious the most key characteristic of birds: flight. )

stevebee92653 Ah, the 2 or 3 in10,000 exception! Why did I think some evo would bring those up.  The trap snapped.  Amazing.  I never said I was a biologist.  That makes you a “liar”.  Why is it that evos like you are so focused on calling people childish names?  What’s wrong with you indoctrinates?  I am a dentist.  I’ve had MORE biology courses than the equivalent of an MS. FYI There actually are just about zero actual biologists on Earth.  (Percentage wise, of course. Less than .001% of humans are biologists.)  Actual biologists are practically non-existent.  Most who studied biology are MD’s, dentists, teachers.  Few are actual biologists.)  Flight isn’t defining in birds? Are you kidding?

SanRafaelSwell:  Actually, you did claim to be a biologist.  (Again, no I didn’t’.) It is in the comments. I have a PhD (not an MS) in biology you git, I already told you. A dentist couldn’t possibly have required more bio courses. You are an idiot.  (Ah, the name calling card again.  These guys are sure good at that strategy. When evolutionauts get frustrated, they always play the name calling card.)  Zero biologists? So no one on earth studies life?  (Dumb conclusion.) How delusional are you? Flight is NOT defining in birds otherwise bats and dragonflies would be birds, they aren’t.  (Oh my gawd.  This guy needs a course in logic.)  One is a mammal, the other an insect. An ostrich wouldn’t be a bird, it is.

stevebee92653:  Gosh, if you have a PHD in biology, then you must know everything! And I am a lowly idiot. Well, there you go. What more needs to be said? When I thought of birds, I always thought about flight. Forget that nonsense.  Now I think about T. rex’s and those teensy weensy arms, and those sharp killer teeth.  Forget the flight bullshit. Thanks for clearing that up!

stevebee92653:  Just think. You have a PhD in a fable! My gawd. No wonder you’re so pissed off. Why did you waste your time? And in ecology? I bet there are tons of jobs for someone with a PhD in evolution. Maybe you could open an office. People could come in and pay you for treating them with evolution. Your parents should have given you some advice before you started college.

SanRafaelSwell: I work at a natural history museum as a paleoecologist.  I love my job and my work effects your life in more ways than you know.  (This guy is a dreamer.  His work affects my life?)  A dentist would not be ignorant of this.  You are no dentist.  (I’m not?  OK, whatever he says.  He is a PHD, after all. I thought I was a dentist.)  You claim that biology doesn’t exist (I claim that biology doesn’t exist? Wow.  Citing please.)  at the same time as purporting to have taken more biology classes than someone with a doctorate in the field. ( I said that?  Citing please.) Do you realize what this looks like?  (Looks like this guy should stay in the museum and keep on effecting my life, and so many others.)

SanRafaelSwell:  This is called schooling you.(He declares victory, as is the case with all evolutionauts.)  It is obvious to any rational person that you haven’t a clue what you are talking about here. Still waiting for you to cite the characteristics from my list that are absent in birds. Yup, still waiting…..(And the oft-used, by evolutionauts, Yup!  What a finish.)  Starting to think you are a POE. (And the oft used name calling. I would think a PHD would be above this childish strategy.)

• SanRafaelSwell:  We don’t have pictures of non-avian theropods because they are extinct. We only have drawings and they are subjective. The bones of avian and non-avian theropods are not subjective however, we have them to observe. Hummingbirds and woodpeckers are very different but when you compare the two you will see that every characteristic they share (minus a beak without teeth, lack of a long bony tail), they also share with T. rex. Archaeopteryx didn’t lack these and thus is transitional.

• SanRafaelSwell:  Name one species of bird from the fossil record that is older than the oldest Theropod.

  stevebee92653: How about you do it.  (This PHD doesn’t realize that in the vid in question, I stated that the first bird existed before the theropod it was supposed to have evolved from. Which is true.  He misread it in PHD fashion, and thought I said the first bird was before the first theropod.  I said “you do it” because these locked indoctrinates get to be boring.  Why should I waste my time with a guy whose best argument is childish name calling.  He is hopeless.)

• SanRafaelSwell: I do what? Name a species of bird from the fossil record that is older than the oldest theropod. I can’t do so because no such bird exists. If you are talking about Protoavis, wow….you have a lot of research to do. Protoavis isn’t an accepted genus of dinosaur. It is a chimera most likely.

• stevebee92653: A tip: try Google. I know you can find the most ancient bird on your own, and check the period they existed. I KNOW you can. You also must know how absurd the notion of theropods evolving into chickens is. If that story was in the Bible, what would you have to say about it? But it’s in evo-lore so you accept the fable as science.You are cool.  Groupthink wins out. You can believe with great confidence this most silly of all sciences because your peers believe also.

• SanRafaelSwell: Oldest known bird is Archaeopteryx and it is from the Jurrasic. Oldest known Theropod is either Herrerrasaurus or Eoraptor. They are both from the Triassic, i.e. OLDER than Archaeopteryx. You are wrong, accept it. I, unlike you AM a real biologist. I accept evolution because I observed on a day to day basis. Go to school buddy.

• stevebee92653: Kind of like you “accepted” Jesus? Do you “accept” astronomy and physics? I love the transparent slips of evolutionauts. I would NEVER say “I accept biology or physics” or any other science. Theropods died out 65MYA. First bird: 150 MYA. Who cares anyway. Anyone who believes theropods became hummingbirds and woodpeckers will believe anything and is useless to argue with. You “observe evolution on a day to day basis”? Are you hallucinating?

• SanRafaelSwell: I accept the theory of evolution to be a fact, just I accept both theories of relativity as fact. All three have been tested and upheld to be true. First Theropod 200 million years ago. Yup, theropods came first. Again, you obviously haven’t a clue what you are talking about. Theropods didn’t become hummingbirds and woodpeckers. Hummingbirds and woodpeckers ARE theropods. GO TO SCHOOL.

  stevebee92653:  My gawd,hummingbirds are theropods? Theropods? EGAD! And we have been living among them. We could all be KILLED. Why I was just near a flower today that had TWO OF THEM! TWO HUMMINGBIRDS SUCKING NECTAR! Thank gawd they didn’t see me! Scuse me.I am going to go CLOSE ALL MY WINDOWS!

• PS. WATCH OUT FOR CHICKENS!

  SanRafaelSwell: I don’t think schooling will have any effect, if the exchanges here are anything to go by.  🙂   Birds do not have fixed femurs.  That is a bold faced fucking lie. (This guy is really serious!  Not only a lie, but a bald faced fucking lie!)  Watch an Ostrich run and you can see its thigh moving. What a load of bullshit!!! (I thought ostriches weren’t birds.) Creationists have to lie, that is all they have.

• stevebee92653:  Are you always this mad? Gawd, I certainly hope not.

And with that, we concluded our debate.