http://www.macroevolution.net/pangolins.html

I know this is just a pile of logical fallacies but where to begin. I mean yeah it's basically just cherry picking. I mean they list similarities between Pangolins, Stegosaurids and Armadillos, and Ancleosaurs respectively but then ignores features that Pangolins, Armadillos, share with all mammals and each other but not their claimed ancestor. I.E. Breast bone, their hips. etc.

I could go on, but I'll just point at one last example. Kentrosaurus Had more spikes then toes so it's kinda hard to attribute them to claws.

Oh wait, this is Eugene M. McCarthy. Who thinks humans share a closer ancestry with pigs than with chimpanzees.

See more on this here.

Jesus Christ how do these people graduate?? Have standards in universities totally collapsed?

Hey, it's only a theory, like evilushun is just a theory. And it proves that the Jews & Muslims are right not to eat pork, 'cos that's nearly cannibalism.

The wide acceptance of the notion that ankylosaurs are reptiles can be attributed to two factors:

1) most paleontologists specializing in dinosaurs are unlikely to be familiar with the specifics of armadillo anatomy (which is, in fact, poorly known compared to that of most mammals);

Dinosaurs aren't even reptiles. Stating what paleontologists aren't familiar with doesn't discount what they are familiar with.

Does this fall under the phrase "Not even wrong"?

Feathers!

RS

You might as well suggest that a giraffe is similar to a diplodocus, 'cos it's got four legs, a tail & a long neck, therefore ...

Or say a creationist is similar to a sea squirt because once it gets attached it digests its own brain.

I love Pangolins...I remember the first time I saw one. It was a stuffed museum exhibit, I was about fifteen, and I'd never even heard of them before. I honestly thought it was a model of some prehistoric creature. Then I learned they were actually still living and I was even more astounded.

They're so weird they're awesome.
I also always loved the explanation of their name: "The name pangolin comes from the Malay word pengguling, meaning "something that rolls up". You can't get more accurate than that...

chairman bill wrote:You might as well suggest that a giraffe is similar to a diplodocus, 'cos it's got four legs, a tail & a long neck, therefore ...

Well, they're both tetrapods.

Animavore wrote:

The wide acceptance of the notion that ankylosaurs are reptiles can be attributed to two factors:

1) most paleontologists specializing in dinosaurs are unlikely to be familiar with the specifics of armadillo anatomy (which is, in fact, poorly known compared to that of most mammals);

Dinosaurs aren't even reptiles.
...

No, but they are within the reptile clade, having evolved from a reptile. This makes some paleontologists refer to them as "reptiles".

The fun part being, of course, that by the time one starts examining the Therapsid and Synapsid lineages, the reptile lineages that gave rise to the first proto-mammals, I think it was Ken Miller who said that in palaeontological circles, there was a fairly heated debate over where to draw the line between "mammal-like reptiles" and "reptile like mammals". But of course, these put in an appearance in the Middle Permian, a good 50 million years before the Mesozoic Era.

Darwinsbulldog wrote:Jesus Christ how do these people graduate?? Have standards in universities totally collapsed?

That someone graduates is no guarantee of future competence or stability. It's just (one hopes) some measure of competence at some point in time.

Most people who crash cars have passed driving tests.

Most people who crash planes are qualified pilots.