Evolution - Yes it DID bloody well happen!

A lack of comprehension does not a contradictory argument make. In the sense you mean yes it is reducable. Each set of codons codes for a specific part of the body. Mutation is the direct result of specific reduction. Sometimes the end result of said mutation is death, less often an entirely new species can be generated. Variations also occur in the middle. Because you have trouble understanding a concept, does not perclude that concept from being probable. In the case of the widely accepted explanation you are without ground for arguing. For the last time ignorance is not a good motivation.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

"A lack of comprehension does not a contradictory argument make. "

Talking like Yoda doesn't make up for being stupid.

Until you show me an RNA only creature you've got no case for evolution.

Ben

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Laugh it up Cris.

You've got no case for evolution being anything other than a modern fairy tale.

The only examples you have are MICROevolution. MACROevolution has never been observed and hasn't even been proven to be possible without the direct help of scientists (e.g. intelligence).

Ben

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

heh, i cant believe they past a law like that. i would think its more science than relegion or maybe even a type of history.

 

Kalvinb,

Well thankyou I will enjoy your joke.

Of course it still beats your fantasies of gods and such that have zero evidence or support and can't even rate as a poor hypothesis.

So dream on and delude yourself as you wish.

Pretty much the whole of the scientific world has no problem with evolutionary facts and theories, and many religions, including catholicism also recognize evolution as acceptable science.

While I recognize that a majority view of something doesn't necessarily represent truth, in the case of evolution the evidence is so overwhelming that your heavily biased and distorted minority view really lacks any meaningful credibility.

Only in the USA does a small group of creationists hold on to archaic views that Genesis has any factual basis. The rest of the civilized world has moved on and is using science and evolution to make significant progress.

Why not give up your futile and backward ideas and join the rest of the enlightened world?

Cris

 

KB, no wonder macroevolution hasn't been fully observed yet. We scientists are not dealing with rediculously small timescales of thousands of years, but rather billions of years. Evolution has been observed in organisms, but I agree with you that it hasn't been completely observed (to the point where there is no doubt about the fact that it happens with all organisms).

I find it interesting, however, that you continue to demand hard proof for evolution yet have not a shred of any kind of proof supporting creation. You seem to have no problem believing in creation despite this, mind telling me why you don't believe a theory backed up a large amount of evidence that grows each year?

Evolution is being proven before your very eyes, whether you want to admit to it or not is a different story. However, if you feel the need to stay behind while the rest of us move on to an accurate understanding of our origins then be my guest.

 

I can believe it passed. Evolutionists are a bunch of elitist close minded individuals who can't see past their own nose.

Basically any argument against evolution no matter how valid is accused of being religious by evolutionist fanatics in order to prevent it from being introduced to kids so said kids can't make an informed decision about what they want to believe.

They basically pull the same shit they accuse Christians of pulling. It's all a bunch of bullshit really.

Ben

 

"I find it interesting, however, that you continue to demand hard proof for evolution yet have not a shred of any kind of proof supporting creation."

That's because you're too deaf to realize I'm putting evolution on the same boat as religion. "Evolution IS a religion." Remember that? I am curious as to when the earplugs come out for you people.

It's not my fault your homework doesn't exist anymore. Believeing it was there in the first place is what make evolution a religion.

Ben

 

"Pretty much the whole of the scientific world has no problem with evolutionary facts and theories"

You're either ignorant or a liar. Oh wait, I remember this one. Any scientist who rejects evolution isn't a real scientist.

"and many religions, including catholicis also recognize evolution as acceptable science."

Teenage boy banging priests accept evolution? There's a light post if I ever saw one. Most religions are more concerned with numbers than the truth. They'll preach whatever will get people in the door.

WITH NO PROOF EVOLUTION IS NO MORE THAN A RELIGION

It's all very very simple. The evidence for evolution DOES NOT EXIST.

The only reason you accept it is because you're too close minded to consider the supernatural. Therefore everything that doesn't exist to prove evolution must have existed at one time anyway since well, there's no other explaination.

If you think I'm funny you should listen to you.

Ben

 

Kalvinb,

Very eloquent, but a meaningless statement.

And since creationism requires a creator (a god) then that claim is perfectly accurate – creationism has a fully religious basis. And until religionists can prove that a god exists then any and all arguments you submit must be invalid, since your basis has no factual or evidential support.

No not really. You’re just paranoid.

Evolution is science. Science has proven it’s worth countless times. Religion remains based on fantasies, and has never produced anything of value.

Cris

 

"Very eloquent, but a meaningless statement."

Says you. You yourself are an elitist that can't see past his own nose.

"No not really. You’re just paranoid"

I would be paranoid if it weren't proven to be true as recently as the showing of "evolution" on PBS.

"Evolution is science. Science has proven it’s worth countless times."

No, Evolution is a malignant tumor that grew out of science. It could be cut off and science would be no worse off. Nothing good has come from evolution. Nothing that has been observed and called evolution outrules an intelligent designer.

Religion has done many good things. You're just too much of an elitist who can't see past his own nose to notice.

"Evolution is science"

bullshit.

until evolution can be observed and recreated even the scientific method doesn't support it.

It's as much of a fantasy as you accuse Intelligent Design of being.

The only thing that's been proven is that it takes a scientist (intelligence) to do any type of Macroevolution. Proof of "micro"evolution is neutral evidence.

Ben

 

KalvinB: Apparently you did NOT read the extremely informative and useful links I posted at the very beginning of this thread. Here they are again:

http://books.nap.edu/html/creationism/
http://www.ucmp.berkeley.edu/history/evolution.html
http://www.evolutionhappens.net/

And one more for the road: http://www.talkorigins.org/

If you wish to call us ignorant and such, first PLEASE make some effort and read through those things, particularly the first one.

 

KB, what can I say? I don't see how evolution qualifies as a religion. Evolution has some real proof behind it. Evolution predicts observations, and guess what, they actually happen just as it predicts. Evolution is the single theory that explains how organisms have changed over time to accomidate the vast number of species we have today.

Religion remains based on fantasies, and has never produced anything of value.

Oh, I wouldn't say that Cris. It's given my quite a few laughs from this forum

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

I would be paranoid if it weren't proven to be true as recently as the showing of "evolution" on PBS.

So you're going to yell 'conspiracy' because there's been one crappy program on evolution shown on PBS? Do what you will, just don't expect anyone to take you seriously.

Proof of "micro"evolution is neutral evidence.

No, it isn't. Notice the word 'evolution' in your sentance. Guess what? Evolution is what we're trying to prove here. The only reason it hasn't been observed on the macro scale very much is because it takes anywhere from tens of thousands of years to millions for noticable change to occur in a species. So until we can invent time travel we'll have to make due with microevolutionary proof and the observations of macro evolution that we do have.

You're either ignorant or a liar. Oh wait, I remember this one. Any scientist who rejects evolution isn't a real scientist.

Man KB, you're just full of stupid statements today. Where'd you hear that? Could you point me to a scientific website that states that? Science is not only about proving theories, but about trying to disprove them as well. It's the goal and duty of scientists to critizise every new theory until it becomes undisputable. Anyone who disproves evolution (note how I say disPROVES) will surely win a Nobel Prize and be admired as a great scientist like Darwin is today.

Stop spreading your baseless propeganda KB, it's not making you look any more intelligent.

WITH NO PROOF EVOLUTION IS NO MORE THAN A RELIGION

Well then, it's a good thing evolution has proof isn't it?

The only reason you accept it is because you're too close minded to consider the supernatural.

The only reason you accept religion is because you're too close minded to consider science. There, see how easy these are?

Therefore everything that doesn't exist to prove evolution must have existed at one time anyway since well, there's no other explaination.

No, but I would say they did exist at some time because we find fossiles of them. Or are you going to tell me that's just a big conspiracy as well?

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

I hear you.

Way to go KB.


Love

Jan Ardena.

 

"The only reason you accept religion is because you're too close minded to consider science. There, see how easy these are?"

You're too stupid to realize that evolution != science. I can reject evolution and still accept science.

Micro-evolution isn't "Evolution"

Evolution encompasses Micro and Macro evolution. Since Micro evolution doesn't disprove intelligent design it's a moot topic but of course that's all you have so you ignorantly push it like it means something.

Macro evolution has ZERO proof therefore "Evolution" is just a religion.

An evolutionist looks at a rock and sees two dinosaurs. There are no transistional fossils but since evolution is true, they must exist or the one just gave birth to the other and there are no stages.

This is not science. It's called religion. A myth. It's unobservable it can't be recreated it's not science.

Ben

 

LOL.

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

Me too. Sir Loone!!! Just too funny for words.

The modern day Flat Earth society - the "creationists".

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

It must be a smear campaign against science when they want to label themselves "creation SCIENTISTS".

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

Another oxymoron. Along the lines of "christian intellect".

 

KalvinB get your act together.

By definition elitist and majority cannot both be used to describe something. You are in the minority. That makes you the elitist on this issue. Remember, religion may be popular, but so too is evolution. Those numbers overlap to a great degree.

I am sadened that you have come to this false conclusion. If you accept a system you need the capacity to follow the conclusions the system makes, regardless of personal feelings. That is the very definition of science and the idea of objective observation.

"Intelligent design" is another way of being elitist. You aren't like the other animals.

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

A superiority complex is also not prrof of your position. Your bias is clouding your mind from the likely truth.

Hypocracy.

Actually there is more. Multiple instances of a uniform ocular development theory. We have a definitive set of steps from a couple lumps of brain tissue, capable of detecting light and then to a liquid filled sack capable of sensing motion and general shapes. Finally we have the complex eye that can discriminate finer detail. Thsi structure is still in no way perfect. We are an ongoing work as every other creature. What sort of intelligent designer would impart organs that have no function? If we are superior to other animals, then why do they have larger ranges of hearing, night vision, and superior locomotion?

Aspeciation is observable. Mutation is a fact. If you disagree, talk to the altered frogs.

 

"By definition elitist and majority cannot both be used to describe something. You are in the minority. That makes you the elitist on this issue. Remember, religion may be popular, but so too is evolution. Those numbers overlap to a great degree"

You have no idea what an elitist is do you? It has nothing to do with numbers.

The rest of your post is more denial. Macroevolution has never been shown to be possible without the aid of intelligence.

Nothing you say can change the fact that Evolution != Science and that Evolution == Religion.

Unless somehow you've managed to observe and recreate macroevolution. Science hasn't reached a conclusion because it's impossible when it comes to evolution. Evolution is a malignant tumor that has yet to be cut off. It'll never be proven since the only "proof" available is pure speculation that has no real world backing.

Ben

 

You need to grasp the small concepts and then graduate to the more complex issues.

elite n 1 : the choice part; esp : a socially superior group 2: a small group excercising power by virtue of real or claimed superiority in ability or technical competence

Note where the world small is used. In the context this is a relative small, and therefore can be replaced with minority. This is dependent on numbers.

In other words you cannot challenge my facts.

It is a religion without a congregation, mantra, or the name sake. In the respect that its ideas are written on paper it is similar. In that its ideas have potential to change it is not. In that respect every other document written shares the same commonalities. If evolution is religion then so too is everything else.

How about this:
Unless somehow you've managed to observe and recreate God. Religion hasn't reached a conclusion because it's impossible when it comes to God. God is a malignant tumor that has yet to be cut off. It'll never be proven since the only "proof" available is pure speculation that has no real world backing.

In that scenario you would be right. The problem: you are right about your position not mine. I think hypocrite is not strong enough.

If a legitimate scientist said that evolution might have a problem or creation might have some merit I might reevaluate. As it stands neither of the two have yet to occur.

 

Just like to point out something that was saidby kalvin

Seems like you are trying to make a link between religion and myth, congradulations i agree, religions are myths