Some Reasons I Don't Believe in Evolution

[Doveaman]

Another one?

Yup.

 

[Doveaman]

What are you smoking?

Saloop

It's quite simple. Go reply to this comment. In the place where you type your response, type in the word creationists. Also type in the words design proponents. Done? Excellent! Now, use your mouse to highlight design proponents, right-click and select copy. Now go to the word creationists, and again using your mouse, highlight the reation part of it. Right-click on that and select paste. The design proponents part that you copied will be inserted to replace the highlighted reation part and voila! you get cdesign proponentsists!

Oh, that's how he did it!

I thought he used a scissors and glue.

I had a bit too much saloop.

 

[British Bulldog]

Yup.

What's wrong with you people?

 

[Loudmouth]

Intelligent Design is pointing to the facts that information
cannot be fabricated by non-intelligent sources,

Every single physical interaction produces information. If this is what ID claims then a simple chemical reaction proves them wrong. You should really brush up on your physics.

that matter
does not assemble itself into living systems,

We need to add developmental biology to the things you don't understand.

that the
living systems we do see have nearly infinite complexity,

Now we need to add math to the list.

and that everything we see points to an intelligent
designer.

Everything thus far points to your abject ignorance of science and math.

Anything that creates something better than what it starts
with is a perpetual motion machine.

Now we need to add thermodynamics to the list of things you are ignorant of.

Information, energy,
heat, you name it. They are all hoaxes.

How would you know that they are hoaxes when you do not understand thermodynamics or information theory?

 

[mpok1519]

We're not going to go changing things around just because you think 'pure DNA seems to be entirely speculation'.

Because that's not how you properly interpret Scripture.

It wasn't taboo until it was prohibited in writing.

Oh, so, something is only wrong if it is written down as being wrong. Rape was absolutely fine, until someone wrote down that it was not.

what garbage.

 

[mpok1519]

Who said anything about "two individuals"? We are talking about Jesus returning to an inhabited earth to bring salvation to His people. Didn't your reverend teach you that?

I was referring to how two humans were in charge of populating the entire earth. Which just couldn't happen.

If your reverend did, then what's this nonsense all about:

Did you read the part that said I didn't interpret scripture the same as you?

 

[AV1611VET]

Oh, so, something is only wrong if it is written down as being wrong. Rape was absolutely fine, until someone wrote down that it was not.

what garbage.

The DNA pool was much purer at one time.

When it got corrupt enough that sibling marriages had to stop, it was prohibited.

Case closed.

 

[AV1611VET]

Did you read the part that said I didn't interpret scripture the same as you?

Ah -- thank you for clarifying this doosey:

Oh, so, something is only wrong if it is written down as being wrong. Rape was absolutely fine, until someone wrote down that it was not.

what garbage.

 

[British Bulldog]

The DNA pool was much purer at one time.

When it got corrupt enough that sibling marriages had to stop, it was prohibited.

Case closed.

How exactly was pure DNA corrupted? I'm talking at the molecular level. How does that work?

 

[FrenchyBearpaw]

When it got corrupt enough that sibling marriages had to stop, it was prohibited.

Oops.

 

[Greg1234]

Okay, so the letters in "creationists" were bigger than the letters in "design proponents"? Is that it?

design proponents
ocreationists

Or was "design proponents" written diagonally across "creationists"?

There's a good summary of the incident here. Response to Barbara Forrest's <i>Kitzmiller</i> Account Part V: Phillip Johnson and <i>Of Pandas and People</i> - Evolution News & Views

 

[mpok1519]

The DNA pool was much purer at one time.

When it got corrupt enough that sibling marriages had to stop, it was prohibited.

Case closed.

There is absolutely zero evidence of that.

Cases aren't closed until evidence is presented.

Do you always make a case without evidence?

 

[mpok1519]

Ah -- thank you for clarifying this doosey:

care to be less obtuse?

 

[AV1611VET]

There is absolutely zero evidence of that.

Don't let a lack of evidence slow you down.

How much evidence was there for phlogiston?

Cases aren't closed until evidence is presented.

Fine -- then argue that marrying your sister will produce healthy offspring.

Do you always make a case without evidence?

Obviously you haven't read my profile, have you?

 

[SkyWriting]

Originally Posted by AV1611VET The DNA pool was much purer at one time. When it got corrupt enough that sibling marriages had to stop, it was prohibited.

There is absolutely zero evidence of that.
Cases aren't closed until evidence is presented. Do you always make a case without evidence?

AV does assume some things on faith. I find him to be on track.

"The absence of recombination with a homologous partner means that it [The Y-chromosome] can never be repaired by recombination. This has led to suggestions that the Y is destined for extinction it will eventually dwindle to nothing.
DNA Mutation Rates and Evolution

 

[SkyWriting]

How exactly was pure DNA corrupted? I'm talking at the molecular level. How does that work?

High Frequency and Error-prone DNA Recombination in Ataxia Telangiectasia Cell Lines

https://www.google.com/search?rlz=1...id=chrome&ie=UTF-8&q=dna+recombination+errors

Structural damage to meiotic chromosomes impairs DNA recombination and checkpoint control in mammalian oocytes

 

[AV1611VET]

High Frequency and Error-prone DNA Recombination in Ataxia Telangiectasia Cell Lines

Structural damage to meiotic chromosomes impairs DNA recombination and checkpoint control in mammalian oocytes

Just out of curiosity, are you a scientist? if so, what is your field? genetics?

 

[razeontherock]

What is a 'cdesign proponentsist'?

Letter salad. And not particularly good, at that

 

[Skaloop]

Letter salad. And not particularly good, at that

True. A very poor attempt by Creationists who obviously can't even master the basics of copying and pasting, or spellchecking, or proofreading, or editing. But despite that clear evidence of ineptitude, apparently still know more about the biological sciences than biological scientists.

 

[razeontherock]

I'm sure there are many crackpot explanations.



Wrong. A metaphor has no clear identification. Its not meta, if it can be clearly identified. Because if you are observing it to identify it, the heisenberg uncertainty comes into play, of once you observe something, you are tainting its natural environment, thus negating any objectivity.

You cannot attach objectivity, to scripture. Because it is something so far beyond human comprehesion, that you cannot attach the realities of the natural world to it.

Anybody else see the irony in this?