Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
.....
I will reply next year ... ammm... I mean saturday .
Well, I did warn you that it was going to be a lot of work, but you asked me to go ahead, so don't blame me. Trust me, that was, as I said, such a quick overview of the mountain of evidence for evolution of life-forms, that it came close to being fasification through over - simplification. And all that has been posted Eusebius dismisses with his appeal to 'we can't explain the first cell' and his Creationists crocoduck nonsense.
Quote:
Originally Posted by squall-lionheart
What you see as "Making up science" I see it as the basis for the emergence of new theories .
As you wish
Even if one were to go along with the misunderstanding of one theory as a good way of suggesting others, don't you think that, until the other theories have some sort of mechanism, evidence and case other than looking for unexplained questions, the existing theory should be taken as the best one?
Incidentally, I hope you won't be taken in by Eusebius' transparent ploy which I shall expose below.
Last edited by TRANSPONDER; 04-12-2012 at 03:56 AM..
In other words, squall, rifleman doesn't have any proof we humans came from a single-celled critter which, by sheer magic (without any proof) turned eventually into a fish which, by sheer magic (without any proof) lost its swim suite, grew a neck, arms, legs, air breathing lungs, hair and larger brain to become a chimp which by sheer magic (without any proof) eventually became a human just like rifleman. LOL. In other words, evolution is faith-based. Even though there is no proof, you just have to have faith that that is how it all happened. Glad my ancestors didn't come the route rifleman did. Mine come from geniuses called Adam and Eve. And that explains rifleman's posts. LOL.
Again you play this crafty trick of yours of taking your best point - that there is no proof of abiogenesis - and then pretend that this validates your dismissal of the entire body of evidence for evolution. After coming up with a frankly loopy cartoon - misrepresentation of evolution and, after Rifleman's tough - talking but lucid explanation of utterly misrepresentative it was, you act as though being unable to prove his silly caricature true, evolution is false.
That is only going to convince those who are not interested in the evidence but only in rejecting evolution theory on any foolish pretext that is presented.
What you see as "Making up science" I see it as the basis for the emergence of new theories
Most likely the user is referring to your penchant for inventing nonsense that suits you. For example we all remember the time you declared that no planets with oxygen have been discovered. I corrected you on this and showed there in fact have been.
Also the time you declared the "fact" that moving the earth mere inches closer to or further from the sun would cause it to burn up or freeze respectively. This was made up nonsense too and in fact the distance of the earth from the sun varies over the course of each year in the order of 1000s of kilometres.
What the user is clearly saying is that you misrepresent evolution at will. The evolution you describe and then attack is not the evolution people like myself, rifle and Aq are actually espousing. It is just your strawman and we do not believe it any more than you do.
Not once in any of these threads have you ever actually displayed even the most basic knowledge of what evolution ACTUALLY says and claims. Not once have I ever seen you attack something it actually claims and shown it to be false. Instead you just retreat to making up your own facts, such as but not limited to the two I just mentioned above, in order to try and make a case for god that is otherwise non existent without your invented fantasy facts. Either that or you just deflect by posting meaningless non sequitur links to you tube music videos.
The first day you actually engage Evolution Theory for what it is, not what you pretend it is, will be a surprise to all of us and I think you will find more users such as the one above and myself will actually be more willing to have discourse with you on the subject.
Talking to you about evolution when you are not actually talking about evolution just a nonsense you are calling evolution... is a waste of everyones time. The thread would have been better named "Human's evolution in the most simplistic way ." You are just talking at length about a subject you clearly know nothing about, have displayed literally no desire to learn anything about, but have clear religious motivations for attacking it all the same in a way that, realise it or not, likely harms your cause more than helps it. In fact, the only reason it is worth keeping you talking at all is to highlight just how ridiculous theism makes people get. You do our job for us with every post.
Not sure why this is a surprise? If they are classed as "human" then we would very much expect there to be essentially little difference. It is the ones not classed as "human" you need to be interested in.
Quite a lot of people discussing the subject of evolution always seem to expect a sudden and massive change somewhere along the line. Some, like convicted criminal Kent Hovind, even expecting Dogs to suddenly give birth to something that is not a dog which will then get up and head off and create a whole new species.
It does not work that way. The effect of evolution is more like a rainbow where it is impossible to define a moment when a color, say orange, becomes another like red. There is no doubt that Orange eventually does cycle into being Red, but there is no discernible point when this occurs. If you pick any point on a rainbow then the points before and after it will essentially appear exactly the same. From point to point there is hardly any noticeable change.
Pull back and look at the bigger picture however and you see massive change accumulating from the massive amount of tiny point changes. THAT is the kind of thing you expect too from evolution.
The earliest known human skeletal remains are essentially the same as today's human. The only ones significantly different have been shown to be apes.
Of course. A very simple way of dismissing the evidence for human evolution. Anything that looks a bit more ape - like is an ape and anything a bit more human -like is a human. Ignore or dismiss the signs of transition and say there are none -just some micro - evolution ,,,uhhh which isn't actually evolution at all...
Denial, denial, denial.
There are no "signs of transition" to ignore. Provide one and you will be famous for discovering the "missing link". The link is missing because it doesn't exist except in theory.
There are no "signs of transition" to ignore. Provide one and you will be famous for discovering the "missing link". The link is missing because it doesn't exist except in theory.
Actually signs of transition are abound, some of them predicted with such degrees of accuracy that either Evolution is clearly true or the people who made the prediction have displayed consistent levels of luck akin to winning their state lottery numerous times in a row.
The issue is there is no "missing link". Refer again to the rainbow analogy above. There is no "link" between red and orange on a rainbow. It is a smooth, continuous, slow transition from one into the other. The same is true of life on this planet.
If you hear phrases like "missing link" you are actually hearing someone who does not at all understand Evolution Theory.
If you hear phrases like "missing link" you are actually hearing someone who does not at all understand Evolution Theory.
Or does...
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
but you asked me to go ahead, so don't blame me. Trust me, that was, as I said, such a quick overview of the mountain of evidence for evolution of life-forms, that it came close to being fasification through over - simplification. And all that has been posted Eusebius dismisses with his appeal to 'we can't explain the first cell' and his Creationists crocoduck nonsense.
,,,uhhh which isn't actually evolution at all...
