The tip of the ice berg

[TLK Valentine]

I am aware that the modern theory takes in account genetics and other factors that Darwin didn't but I'm not an expert on it and wouldn't try to argue with you about it. Just because I posted a link about Tour doesn't mean I agree with everything Aussie Pete is saying

Then you should be careful... most modern anti-evolutionists are more interested in collecting followers than collecting facts.

 

[eleos1954]

Arguments from incredulity go nowhere... just so you know.

no the mathematical probably (and other data) just gets ignored by many .... pretty INCREDULOUS ... just so you know.

 

[Astrid]

What is a fact? The Theory of Evolution? Ottawak says you don't get that with a scientific theory. Read what he posted in his reply to Aussie Pete. Or that someone else would have discovered it? I can't see how you call that a fact

https://royalsocietypublishing.org/doi/10.1098/rsnr.2004.0081

 

[driewerf]

A brown-eyed mom and dad have a brown-eyed baby.

Therefore we crawled out of an ocean that was created when a comet hit the earth.

Your answer demonstrates that 160 years after Darwin creationists have zero science to offer but only ridicule and straw men. But doing science is way too hard for them.
And it illustrates - as already very often in this thread - that the OP was spot on.

 

[driewerf]

Absolutely.

He didn't invent evolution any more than Newton invented gravity and momentum.

The evidence is there to be discovered.

I suspect if there was no Darwin we'd still be here arguing with Creationists calling us Wallaceonians or something similar.

Luckily that Darwin was first. Wallaceonism is so much harder to pronounce.

 

[BPPLEE]

https://royalsocietypublishing.org/doi/10.1098/rsnr.2004.0081

https://royalsocietypublishing.org/doi/10.1098/rsnr.2004.0081

I'm familiar with Wallace. There were also other theories that didn't gain as much support Alternatives to Darwinian evolution - Wikipedia

 

[TLK Valentine]

no the mathematical probably (and other data) just gets ignored by many .... pretty INCREDULOUS ... just so you know.

Are you doing anything to alleviate this alleged oversight?

 

[AV1611VET]

And it illustrates - as already very often in this thread - that the OP was spot on.

Taking the OP into consideration, evolutionists are on the Titanic.

 

[driewerf]

Taking the OP into consideration, evolutionists are on the Titanic.

And the creationists are the orchestra that continuous to play, ignoring all the evidence of sinking.

 

[BPPLEE]

And the creationists are the orchestra that continuous to play, ignoring all the evidence of sinking.

That would be a good comeback but the orchestra knew they were sinking. They weren't ignoring it they accepted it

 

[Astrid]

Luckily that Darwin was first. Wallaceonism is so much harder to pronounce.

Schicklegruberism would have been way problematic

 

[Astrid]

I'm familiar with Wallace. There were also other theories that didn't gain as much support Alternatives to Darwinian evolution - Wikipedia

Then why ask

 

[TLK Valentine]

Taking the OP into consideration, evolutionists are on the Titanic.

It's going to take more than passive-aggressive revenge fantasies to disprove the ToE.

 

[AV1611VET]

It's going to take more than passive-aggressive revenge fantasies to disprove the ToE.

Is it because the ToE was born out of those passive-aggressive revenge fantasies fight-or-flight fantasies?

 

[TLK Valentine]

Is it because the ToE was born out of those passive-aggressive revenge fantasies fight-or-flight fantasies?

I neither know nor care what you are referring to. Make a point?

 

[Larniavc]

The mathematical probability of "happen chance" over billions of years for even a single cell to "form" is horrendous much less with the cells ability to copy itself.

What exactly is this numerical value of probability you refer to?

 

[Belk]

no the mathematical probably (and other data) just gets ignored by many .... pretty INCREDULOUS ... just so you know.

The mathematical probability is 1. Anyone whom tells you otherwise is selling you a fantasy.

 

[ottawak]

no the mathematical probably (and other data) just gets ignored by many .... pretty INCREDULOUS ... just so you know.

The mathematical probability arguments either contain no mathematics or the mathematics are completely bogus. They are ignored because they have been dismissed long ago.

 

[ottawak]

What is a fact? The Theory of Evolution? Ottawak says you don't get that with a scientific theory. Read what he posted in his reply to Aussie Pete. Or that someone else would have discovered it? I can't see how you call that a fact

Evolution is a fact. The theory of evolution explains the process.

 

[TLK Valentine]

What is a fact? The Theory of Evolution? Ottawak says you don't get that with a scientific theory. Read what he posted in his reply to Aussie Pete. Or that someone else would have discovered it? I can't see how you call that a fact

That evolution happens is an observed fact.

The theory of evolution explains how evolution happens.