How can you prove evolution?

bluejeans · Oct 12, 2004

Harry Potter is fiction just like Darwin's fairytales were.
Evolution is not science at all,and it has no evidence to support it.
Look at what the creationist scientists are saying about it. Darwin
copied ideas from the ancient pagans which has now been confirmed,
yet those who don't realize it yet are still using false claims on message
boards. They obviously are not into the latest news or research.

Hydra009 · Oct 12, 2004

NatJo said:
I take the creationist view of evolution judging by the evidence not assumption.

Young, Old, or Gap? What's the evidence that supports your claim?

NatJo · Oct 12, 2004

Let's not quote on what bluejeans just said. Otherwise, this thread is going to be flooded.

NatJo · Oct 12, 2004

Evolution is baseless to some extent without a good theory of abiogenesis, which it does not have.

Hydra009 · Oct 12, 2004

Evolution is baseless to some extent without a good theory of abiogenesis, which it does not have.

Actually, it doesn't matter to evolutionary theory how exactly life first came to be on Earth. If it were a divine spark, a natural process of simple chemicals ---> polymers ---> replicating polymers ---> hypercycle ---> protobiont ---> bacteria, planted by aliens, or even if it were the will of Cthulhu, it wouldn't matter. All evolution explains is the biodiversity of life on Earth. It does not explain the origin of life on Earth.

Jet Black · Oct 12, 2004

bluejeans said:
Harry Potter is fiction just like Darwin's fairytales were.

so I guess you have never actually read Origins then?

Evolution is not science at all,and it has no evidence to support it.

false, stop lying. there is significant evidence supporting it.

Look at what the creationist scientists are saying about it. Darwin
copied ideas from the ancient pagans which has now been confirmed,

sources?

yet those who don't realize it yet are still using false claims on message
boards. They obviously are not into the latest news or research.

many of us are actually doing the latest news and research.

Jet Black · Oct 12, 2004

NatJo said:
Evolution is baseless to some extent without a good theory of abiogenesis, which it does not have.

false. evolution is a biogenic theory which assumes the existance of life. it does not need abiogenesis at all.

Vance · Oct 12, 2004

NatJo said:
Evolution is baseless to some extent without a good theory of abiogenesis, which it does not have.

No, only the YEC strawman version of evolution incorporates abiogenesis. The YEC strawman version involves a belief that all this happened without God, and so it is convenient for them to throw in abiogenesis and then claim that evolution is atheistic.

Not evolution, of course, but it is a LOT easier to argue against than the true scientific principals.

bluejeans · Oct 12, 2004

Evolution first of all has no facts and no proof to support it.
second,it is not science.
third it's easy to see that it is fake.
I believe evolution is a religious belief that has nothing to do
with atheistism thats why the atheists slash evolutionists look
so darn silly all the time.

USincognito · Oct 12, 2004

bluejeans said:
third it's easy to see that it is fake.

It sure is honey.. it sure is...

Ondoher · Oct 13, 2004

awstar said:
Doesn't it seem rather -- well -- unlikely -- that humans are the product of a series of "mistakes" ? This is science?

No, we are the product of the process of evolution. This process has variation increasing due to mutation and variation decreasing due to natural selection of those traits that are best suited for reproductive success.

Do this long enough and yes, humans are one result.

Mistermystery · Oct 13, 2004

NatJo said:
I take the creationist view of evolution judging by the evidence not assumption.

hahah.

Mistermystery · Oct 13, 2004

bluejeans said:
Harry Potter is fiction just like Darwin's fairytales were.
Evolution is not science at all,and it has no evidence to support it.
Look at what the creationist scientists are saying about it. Darwin
copied ideas from the ancient pagans which has now been confirmed,
yet those who don't realize it yet are still using false claims on message
boards. They obviously are not into the latest news or research.

Care to back that up, missy? 10 bucks say you can't without resorting to ad hom atacks, flawed analogies or just random gibberish.

kingreaper · Oct 13, 2004

NatJo said:
You have human fossils and you have ape fossils. There is no in between, no connection. I try to keep myself versed on the arguments from both sides, by the way.

Every creationist says that, but they all seem to disagree on WHICH ARE HUMAN AND WHICH ARE NON-HUMAN APES?

Whats your take on that

Mistermystery · Oct 13, 2004

NatJo said:
Evolution is baseless to some extent without a good theory of abiogenesis, which it does not have.

Wrong, the theory of evolution accepts the fact that life exisist, just as you accept that at some point a car was made when you got your drivers licence. How that life came to exist is not relevant to evolution, because it's a theory that explains how diffrent species came to be. NOT how the first life began.

Magnus Vile · Oct 13, 2004

kingreaper said:
Every creationist says that, but they all seem to disagree on WHICH ARE HUMAN AND WHICH ARE NON-HUMAN APES?

Whats your take on that

Humans are apes.

Creationists don't like this idea nd tend to get really defensive about it...

Wonder why? We seem to be comfortable with the idea that humans can be monsters, (indeed, some versions of Christianity insist on it) but really don't like the idea that we're part of the world, and not seperate from it.

kingreaper · Oct 13, 2004

Magnus Vile said:
Humans are apes.

Creationists don't like this idea nd tend to get really defensive about it...

Wonder why? We seem to be comfortable with the idea that humans can be monsters, (indeed, some versions of Christianity insist on it) but really don't like the idea that we're part of the world, and not seperate from it.

Ahh, thats why I specified "NON-human apes"

Magnus Vile · Oct 13, 2004

kingreaper said:
Ahh, thats why I specified "NON-human apes"

Yep, but they'll never admit that there is a human ape in the first place. Thier beliefs seem to insist that they are special and seperate from the rest of creation. As if gods work only counts if it includes an opposable thumb...

Jet Black · Oct 13, 2004

Magnus Vile said:
Humans are apes.

Creationists don't like this idea nd tend to get really defensive about it...

Wonder why? We seem to be comfortable with the idea that humans can be monsters, (indeed, some versions of Christianity insist on it) but really don't like the idea that we're part of the world, and not seperate from it.

humans aren't apes because we have a big brain and opposable thumbs, just like humans aren't mammals because we have a big brain and opposable thumbs. hey did you know that we aren't tetrapods, vertebrates or Eucaryotes either? know why? because we have a big brain and opposable thumbs.

Mistermystery · Oct 13, 2004

Jet Black said:
humans aren't apes because we have a big brain and opposable thumbs, just like humans aren't mammals because we have a big brain and opposable thumbs. hey did you know that we aren't tetrapods, vertebrates or Eucaryotes either? know why? because we have a big brain and opposable thumbs.

That is seriously funny.

How can you prove evolution?

bluejeans

Guest

bel esprit

NatJo

Guest

NatJo

Guest

bel esprit

Jet Black

Guest

Jet Black

Guest

Contributor

bluejeans

Guest

a post by Alan Smithee

Veteran

Here's looking at you kid

Here's looking at you kid

Senior Member

Here's looking at you kid

Well-Known Member

Senior Member

Well-Known Member

Jet Black

Guest

Here's looking at you kid

Similar threads

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency