Are there any facts contrary to T.O.E?

[Laodicean60]

Except that we do have evidence of evolution.

Can you point me to a source with evidence that doesn't use the words, that may have, possibly, and all the other adjectives of uncertainty about the hypothesis on the monkey to man theory? I don't reside in a camp so I can honestly say I don't know what happened eons ago, or why all the discussions on ToE if it is backed by evidence.

 

[Astrid]

No, it isn't, this thread is about facts that disprove ToE. I was trying to say we don't have facts proving or disproving ToE just like we don't have scientific facts about God. We hold our own beliefs so why preach it?

I was answering an OT question and the answer may not be music to your ears but you should reprimand the person I was answering. Thank You

I pointed out that it's ignorance to speak of
proving a theory or disproving god.

And that you've offered only such ot ignorance,
NOT any fact as per thread topic.

At least you recognize your posts are o.t.

Now please act responsibly, and cease.

 

[Warden_of_the_Storm]

Can you point me to a source with evidence that doesn't use the words, that may have, possibly, and all the other adjectives of uncertainty about the hypothesis on the monkey to man theory? I don't reside in a camp so I can honestly say I don't know what happened eons ago, or why all the discussions on ToE if it is backed by evidence.

I have to ask first, why is it a negative that any comments on science, especially stuff in the past, uses provisional language instead of sureties, and why is that a problem for you? Science only uses the information it has at hand, and since that information might turn out to be in error one way or another further down the line, it is not wrong for the language to be provisional?

Second question to ask: would you actually accept any such evidence that I provide for you? Honest answer please.

And third... well, not question but third point: the reason why all the discussions on the ToE is because there are people or groups of people who say it is wrong but do not do so on a scientific basis. 9 times out 10, all the commentary against the ToE is because of religious beliefs.

 

[Astrid]

Except that's not really the case at all...

Incomplete data is not a fact contrary to a theory, in any case.

 

[Warden_of_the_Storm]

Incomplete data is not a fact contrary to a theory, in any case.

It never is and I do not understand why it's even seen as one.

 

[Astrid]

Can you point me to a source with evidence that doesn't use the words, that may have, possibly, and all the other adjectives of uncertainty about the hypothesis on the monkey to man theory? I don't reside in a camp so I can honestly say I don't know what happened eons ago, or why all the discussions on ToE if it is backed by evidence.

Asking for lessons in evolution
is not providing facts contrary to the
theory.

If you have none, you've nothing to add here.

 

[Laodicean60]

And that you've offered only such ot ignorance,
NOT any fact as per thread topic.

I'll ask you to offer your facts as I have in the past to my disappointment. Is your ToE about a monkey to a man? I've never claimed to be smart so yes I'm ignorant about many things.

 

[AV1611VET]

Except that's not really the case at all...

Either that, or it is.

 

[Laodicean60]

Second question to ask: would you actually accept any such evidence that I provide for you? Honest answer please.

Yes because I'm open minded about information from all sciences. How to you feel about Quantum science?

 

[Warden_of_the_Storm]

Either that, or it is.

It's not. You claim it's the case, but it's decidedly not the case. Just because we don't have a 100% complete picture of the evolutionary tree does not mean that's a fact contrary to the theory of evolution.

 

[Warden_of_the_Storm]

Yes because I'm open minded about information from all sciences. How to you feel about Quantum science?

Really has nothing to do with evolutionary science, and I much prefer history over physics.

 

[AV1611VET]

It's not. You claim it's the case, but it's decidedly not the case. Just because we don't have a 100% complete picture of the evolutionary tree does not mean that's a fact contrary to the theory of evolution.

"Evolutionary tree" is a visual gimmick that is meant to dupe the public.

A tree can't grow if nutrients can't get to its several parts.

And evolution has more gaps than Tesla's coils.

 

[Warden_of_the_Storm]

"Evolutionary tree" is a visual gimmick that is meant to dupe the public.

The 'evolutionary tree' is a visual aid, nothing more. You can claim it was made 'to dupe the public', but that's all it is: a claim.

A tree can't grow if nutrients can't get to its several parts.

And evolution has more gaps than Tesla's coils.

Such as...?

 

[Laodicean60]

Really has nothing to do with evolutionary science, and I much prefer history over physics.

How do you know it seems you're operating off a belief system? How about cosmology?

 

[AV1611VET]

Really has nothing to do with evolutionary science, and I much prefer history over physics.

Evolution history is a lie -- a huge one.

It has things growing that aren't there.

That's why they "blue line" them on graphs.

To show an uninterrupted flow from Point A to Point Z which, in reality, can't even go from Point A to Point B without missing parts.

 

[Warden_of_the_Storm]

How do you know it seems you're operating off a belief system? How about cosmology?

Okay, I'll explain this simply:
Evolution is a facet of biology, therefore it is studied by biologists and scientists who specialize in facets of biology.
Cosmology and quantum mechanics are not parts of biological science, and therefore they have no bearing whatsoever on the theory of evolution.

Get it?

 

[Warden_of_the_Storm]

Evolution history is a lie -- a huge one.

It has things growing that aren't there.

That's why they "blue line" them on graphs.

To show an uninterrupted flow from Point A to Point Z which, in reality, can't even go from Point A to Point B without missing parts.

You know, you could have saved yourself the trouble by just not writing anything.

 

[AV1611VET]

The 'evolutionary tree' is a visual aid, nothing more.

I know it is.

It is a drawing meant to show its viewers things that aren't there.

You can claim it was made 'to dupe the public', but that's all it is: a claim.

This thread was started as an invitation to post a claim.

I'm posting a claim.

You're more than welcome to disagree with it; as I expect you to do.

Such as...?

Such as what?

A gap is a gap.

Nothing ever existed to fill it in.

 

[Warden_of_the_Storm]

I know it is.

It is a drawing meant to show its viewers things that aren't there.

So you claim.

This thread was started as an invitation to post a claim.

I'm posting a claim.

You're more than welcome to disagree with it; as I expect you to do.

Now that I'll give you.

Such as what?

A gap is a gap.

Nothing ever existed to fill it in.

So you claim.

 

[AV1611VET]

You know, you could have saved yourself the trouble by just not writing anything.

I'll take the trouble, thank you.

My answer to satisfy the OP is simply this:

"Missing links."

If you think I'm wrong, show me pictures of something that exists between Homo [this] and Homo [that].