“On the contrary, there is a considerable body of evidence that these fossil traces, known as ‘dino-fuzz’, have nothing to do with bird feathers…”

Archaeopteryx probably cannot tell us much about the early origins of feathers and flight in true protobirds because Archaeopteryx was, in the modern sense, a bird.

I, and many others, do not find any credible evidence that those structures represent protofeathers.

Paleontologists have tried to turn Archaeopteryx into an earth-bound, feathered dinosaur.

But it’s not. It is a bird, a perching bird. And no amount of ‘paleobabble’ is going to change that.

Instead of regarding birds as deriving from dinosaurs, Scansoriopteryx reinstates the validity of regarding them as a separate class uniquely avian and non-dinosaurian.

To the contrary, I’ve found that the happiest people have found some cause and they stride through life propelled by a commitment.

Quite the contrary; it is the vehicle of savage, destructive nihilism.

It must on the contrary be named.

Every science in a certain degree starts from faith, and, on the contrary, faith, which does not lead to science, is mistaken faith or superstition, but real, genuine faith it is not.

There is not any reasoning which can convince me, contrary to my senses, that three is one, and one three.

Democracy is a hegemonic tool of the West and contrary to Islam. Why do you act as though the entire world needs democracy? And when it comes to homosexuality, the issue is clearly dealt with by the Koran. It says it is forbidden and should be punished.

If religious beliefs and opinions are found contrary to the standards of science they are mere superstitions and imaginations.

Mysticism has been in the past and probably ever will be one of the great powers of the world and it is bad scholarship to pretend the contrary.