Evolution is a Lie

[Split Rock]

Which is what? and please be as specific as that burger you mentioned.

Microevolutionary science? macroevolutionary science? or both?

You guys use the word 'evolution' nowadays without the prefix, then you wonder how someone can claim he believes in evolution in one thread, while condemning it in another.

You may not draw a distinction between microevolution and macroevolution; but I'm from the old school, and I do.

So what may look to you like hypocrisy -- isn't.

But Heaven forbid you guys should see the whole picture; and, most of all, understand it.

It is certainly not "old school" to use micro- vs macro-evolution, especially utilizing the definitions (as murky as they are) that you use for the terms. Darwin, for example never used these terms. Rather, it is very New School and part of the new creationist movement recently adopted since the failures of efforts to get "Creation Science" taught in public schools.

 

[DrkSdBls]

I don't need knowledge to know when a claim is lacking knowledge.

Um, yes you do.

If I were to claim that the movie "Predator" was about a dancing chicken, what good would if be to argue if you have no idea what movie I'm referring to.

 

[sandwiches]

It has no choice...and no proof of anything either way.

You complain that science doesn't explain kinds as though it should, all the while telling us that kind has no explanation now. So, can we explain a kind or can we not?

 

[sandwiches]

You have...yes. Enjoy. I have this...you fail to deal with the lion and man and wolf kinds.

Meh. Failure means we attempted and did not succeed. We're telling you that science doesn't have to deal with religious terms. The day science something stops working in biology because we didn't use your little non-defined term, is the day God can be scientifically verified. Until then, you can prattle on about 'kinds' this and that while science keeps on moving right along just fine!

 

[Nathan Poe]

I don't need knowledge to know when a claim is lacking knowledge.

Which is fortunate, since even the attempt to acquire knowledge takes effort.

 

[Split Rock]

Um, yes you do.

If I were to claim that the movie "Predator" was about a dancing chicken, what good would if be to argue if you have no idea what movie I'm referring to.

Are you telling me that the movie "Predator" was not about a dancing chicken???

 

[Split Rock]

But Heaven forbid you guys should see the whole picture; and, most of all, understand it.

Heaven forbid you guys should stop picking and choosing what you will and will not believe from science.

 

[AV1611VET]

Heaven forbid you guys should stop picking and choosing what you will and will not believe from science.

I use Boolean standards.

 

[Naraoia]

It is certainly not "old school" to use micro- vs macro-evolution, especially utilizing the definitions (as murky as they are) that you use for the terms. Darwin, for example never used these terms.

Yeah, Darwin didn't even call it "evolution", let alone "macroevolution". Isn't the last sentence of Origin the only place the word "evolve" even occurs in the whole book?

 

[Belk]

I use Boolean standards.

And whine when the world doesn't follow along blindly.

 

[analogtube]

I can't see how anyone could possibly believe in this Evolution nonsense. They say we came from monkeys, but I don't look like a monkey and don't act like one. Also, why are there still monkeys if we replaced them? Answer that! Further, how can one animal turn into another? I've never seen a horse give birth to a dog, and neither have you. Lastly, where did they all come from? Things can't just pop into existence. It looks like just another THEORY in this pool of science garbage.

I want to make two points:

1. Maybe someone has already mentioned this, but it appears that you don't know the difference between being wrong and lying. There is a difference.

2. Before you start posting utter nonsense, you may want to get a basic understanding of the subject.

 

[rjc34]

I want to make two points:

1. Maybe someone has already mentioned this, but it appears that you don't know the difference between being wrong and lying. There is a difference.

2. Before you start posting utter nonsense, you may want to get a basic understanding of the subject.

Obvious poe was obvious.

 

[Tinker Grey]

I use Boolean standards.

You use arbitrary standards.

 

[rjc34]

I use Boolean standards.

Because you are the infallible interpreter of what is true or false in this world? (And in the word of god?)

 

[Greg1234]

You complain that science doesn't explain kinds as though it should, all the while telling us that kind has no explanation now. So, can we explain a kind or can we not?

You don't need to know what a kind is to see the limits of adaptation. This is just more deflection.

 

[dad]

Um, yes you do.

If I were to claim that the movie "Predator" was about a dancing chicken, what good would if be to argue if you have no idea what movie I'm referring to.

But if you only claim there was a movie, and can't produce it, I do not need to hire a critic to rip it apart.

 

[dad]

You complain that science doesn't explain kinds as though it should, all the while telling us that kind has no explanation now. So, can we explain a kind or can we not?

No, I am saying science is so zombified, and out of the truth loop, that it doesn't so much know that there were kinds! It has been too busy slapping fossils together in a godless and silly order, and making it's own little rules it thinks everything has to fit into.

 

[dad]

Meh. Failure means we attempted and did not succeed.

True. Nothing to brag about.

We're telling you that science doesn't have to deal with religious terms.

Moot...since it can't deal in the far past created kinds or the future kinds anyhow. Sour grapes.

The day science something stops working in biology because we didn't use your little non-defined term, is the day God can be scientifically verified.

I know. That day is actually soon. I think Christians will already be taken up by the time the state change kicks in, so consider this your heads up. Men won't be able to die, and spirits will live with men, and animals will not be limited to the former instincts, but eagles for example will migrate to places where they never used to, etc... Present biology is just that....here and now. Your attempts to claim it worked in the far past are dream claims.

 

[dad]

Which is fortunate, since even the attempt to acquire knowledge takes effort.

Beating the air or urinating against the wind takes effort too, so? The question is, does the knowledge we do use effort to get matter?

 

[rjc34]

No, I am saying science is so zombified, and out of the truth loop, that it doesn't so much know that there were kinds! It has been too busy slapping fossils together in a godless and silly order, and making it's own little rules it thinks everything has to fit into.

The science fits what's observed, not the other way around.

And we'll keep our 'zombified' science then, if you don't like it you don't have to partake in it. When the population grows to a point where only genetically modified crops can feed us all, you can go hungry.