User talk:Nitron Ninja Apple

Chemically proven? When? Where? How? Ratso 19:14, 4 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

A paper that was published a while back on how dis little critter had feathers that were similar structurally and identical chemically (in the keratin components). I'll look it up later. There is a reason why you never heard about it. The "creation scientists" are willfully ignorant.

EDIT: Here is the abstract to one of them-

We report small fibrous structures associated with a new specimen of Shuvuuia deserti, which we hypothesize are remnants of feather-like epidermal appendages. Multiple analyses suggest that these structures are epidermally derived and contain epitopes consistent with beta-keratin, a protein expressed only in extant "reptiles" and birds. Morphological, microscopic, mass spectrometric, and immunohistochemical studies are consistent with the interpretation that these structures are related to feathers. These data suggest that proteinaceous components may survive across geological time and support the view that alvarezsaurids (Shuvuuia and its allies) are either a lineage of birds or are a lineage phylogenetically close to them. J. Exp. Zool. (Mol. Dev. Evol.) 285:146-157, 1999. Copyright 1999 Wiley-Liss, Inc.

Nitron Ninja Apple 22:44, 4 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

"DO NOT REVEAL WHO I AM ON CREATIONWIKI OR I WILL GET BANNED FROM THERE"

Hi, this is an admin from CreationWiki and I am also a contributor to wikipedia. I saw where you posted the above sentence on Scorpionman's user page. While I appreciate your contribs to CreationWiki, if you are an anti-creationist you are not allowed to edit CreationWiki's articles according to our policy. You will not be banned if you stay within our policies. But if your intent is to put anti-creation content on the site, then you will need to worry about "getting banned." Just thought I'd make it clear to you. Thanks. --A. Morris ^Talk 16:09, 3 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Depends on what you classify as "anti creationist" content. But yeah, I won't start a sudden editing spree pointing out the enormous amount of problems with flood geology. Nitron Ninja Apple 23:30, 5 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Well, I don't know how well that would go off since most of the editors and admins hold to the standard YEC-global flood view. Even though I wouldn't necessarily be opposed to that being put on CreationWiki, if you want to argue against a global flood or any other Creation-related-subject, I suggest you contribute to EvoWiki. But, if you want to help and support Creation, then you are welcome to contribute to CreationWiki. --_└^{A. Morris}_┘^┌_talk^┐ 00:21, 6 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Your question

Hey! Would it be okay if I revealed my presence as an evo on Creationwiki while being able to edit talk pages?

Of course. Evos are welcomed to join in the discussion, however you are only permitted to edit talk pages and perform minor edits (typos, links, etc.) -- do not perform major edits, or you could be blocked for a limited time. --_└^{A. Morris}_┘^┌_talk^┐ 16:30, 15 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Come on

I never said Scorpionman was an idiot, just that his jokes stink. And please, I agree there are plenty of smart YEC's,after all my cousin is one (and she's smart). So don't jump to conclusion's and actually assess the situation.Meson man 18:51, 1 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]