Subduction Zone
Regular Member
You can't argue against evolution if you don't understand it.
Evolution also says everything reproduces after its kind.
It is not our fault if you use the wrong definition of "kind".
Upvote
0
Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
Exactly, so why don't you like people contradicting your fantasies and criticizing you for being so ridiculous and resistant to having your beliefs challenged?
Why do you constantly ignore what 99% of the universe is then claim it is science, when in reality it is religion? Why can't you accept the scientific fact that kind has always reproduced after kind and no other way has ever been observed? Ever!
All genetic tests have only proven kind after kind. No animal has ever been observed to evolve into another animal, ever. So why do you constantly promote your religion of evolution when none of science or observational evidence agrees?
Then why don't you scientists worry about your own problems, instead of trying to make problems for us by challenging what we hold sacred?
(Or is challenging, venting and ridiculing a popular pastime when scientists don't have anything better to do?)
Well firstly I'm not a scientist, my degree was in the humanities. Secondly how do we keep the demarcation line firm when there's a large well funded political movement to have religious beliefs taught as science and well demonstrated science kicked out?
Well firstly I'm not a scientist, my degree was in the humanities. Secondly how do we keep the demarcation line firm when there's a large well funded political movement to have religious beliefs taught as science and well demonstrated science kicked out?
I don't expect not to be challenged.
In fact, I welcome it.
But challenging is one thing.
Embedding venting, ridicule and downright blasphemy in a challenge is another.
Hiding behind question marks, I call it.
Like Thalidomide?
Earlier...
Right there's a little venting and ridicule hidden behind a question mark. No blasphemy, of course, since one cannot blaspheme science. I won't even get started on the frequency with which you refer to atheists as fools...
What does Thalidomide prove? That deformed human babies are still human and that genetic mutations are always harmful and never beneficial?
No, it proves neither of those things.
Seems that's the only data you got on it, that it caused genetic mutations that were harmful in every single case and not beneficial in a single solitary instance. Funny how that works.
That populations change with respect to heritable characteristics over generational time for one.What well demonstrated science?
That statement would have more weight if anyone had the cojones to define "kind", in any case, taken in broad terms, this observation is just what evolution predicts. Tetrapods after tetrapods, eukaryotes after eukaryotes....Kind after kind which is all that has ever been observed?
Don't blame me for your failures.I fail to see any factual claims in anything any of you have said.
Wouldn't that violate the nested heirarchical pattern of life and falsify evolution?Show me genetic evidence where a rat has become anything other than a rat?
"Show me bricks floating in the air or I won't believe in gravity." Do you guys ever listen to yourselves?Show me genetic evidence where a dog has become anything other than a dog. Where a cat has become anything other than a cat.
That populations change with respect to heritable characteristics over generational time is as well demonstrated as any other scientific theory. That this theory explains a large suite of facts like the multiple matching nested hierarchies and biogeography and fossil succession and morphological and genetic homology and how speciation occurs and why species are adapted to environments is how we know it's useful we'll demonstrated science.Oh that's right, you got not one shred of evidence do you, just flights of fantasy of how you want it to be. Fairie Dust from your religious cosmology to your religion of evolution. It is all Fabricated Ad-hoc inventions Repeatedly Invoked in Effort to Defend Untenable Scientific Theory. Fairie Dust, from your Big Bang to your religious evolutionary beliefs.
You can call it science if you want, but we both know better. It is a religion.
Exactly, so why don't you like people contradicting your fantasies and criticizing you for being so ridiculous and resistant to having your beliefs challenged?
Why do you constantly ignore what 99% of the universe is then claim it is science, when in reality it is religion? Why can't you accept the scientific fact that kind has always reproduced after kind and no other way has ever been observed? Ever!
All genetic tests have only proven kind after kind. No animal has ever been observed to evolve into another animal, ever. So why do you constantly promote your religion of evolution when none of science or observational evidence agrees?
That populations change with respect to heritable characteristics over generational time for one.
Your argument might be worthwhile if you stopped refusing to accept the definition of kind I have given close to 28 times already.That statement would have more weight if anyone had the cojones to define "kind", in any case, taken in broad terms, this observation is just what evolution predicts. Tetrapods after tetrapods, eukaryotes after eukaryotes....
I am not, I am blaming you for your failures of being unable to define what a species is.Don't blame me for your failures.
That populations change with respect to heritable characteristics over generational time is as well demonstrated as any other scientific theory.
That this theory explains a large suite of facts like the multiple matching nested hierarchies and biogeography and fossil succession and morphological and genetic homology and how speciation occurs and why species are adapted to environments is how we know it's useful we'll demonstrated science.
Mutation can result in several different types of change in sequences, Mutations in genes can either have no effect, alter the product of a gene, or prevent the gene from functioning properly or completely. Mutations can also occur in nongenic regions. One study on genetic variations between different species of Drosophila suggests that if a mutation changes a protein produced by a gene, the result is likely to be harmful, with an estimated 70 percent of amino acid polymorphisms having damaging effects, and the remainder being either neutral or weakly beneficial. Due to the damaging effects that mutations can have on genes, organisms have mechanisms such as DNA repair to prevent or correct (revert the mutated sequence back to its original state) mutations.
Close enough.Well firstly I'm not a scientist, my degree was in the humanities.
Oh, I don't think that's gonna happen until the Tribulation period.Secondly how do we keep the demarcation line firm when there's a large well funded political movement to have religious beliefs taught as science and well demonstrated science kicked out?
Dear me!If it was up to AV, the president should immediately sign an executive order, declaring all scientific discoveries that call into question what the bible says, as illegal and have all books that discuss them, burned.
Just quid your own pro quo first.Earlier...
Right there's a little venting and ridicule hidden behind a question mark. No blasphemy, of course, since one cannot blaspheme science. I won't even get started on the frequency with which you refer to atheists as fools...
Because I'm not delusional, and read scientific research journals and realize you don't know what you're talking about.
Thanks, I wonder if I can use your endirsement as course credit toward a second degree.Close enough.
I know you're not part of the movement but it does exist. In any case I'm mainly just interested in correcting errors that folk pick up from people they should have been able to trust but who lied to them instead.Oh, I don't think that's gonna happen until the Tribulation period.
God is still in control.
Close enough.
Oh, I don't think that's gonna happen until the Tribulation period.
God is still in control.
They stopped using well demonstrated science 100 years ago. We just got to wait until they start using it again. For those claiming to follow science I notice a tendency to ignore the facts. Have you ever observed a cat evolve into something other than a cat? Yah, me either, but hey, it happened in the past where none can prove it but that's science. Just make sure you don't claim something happened in the past where you can't prove it, it might be called a religion.
Hal Lindsey says science reached its pinnacle with Isaac Newton.They stopped using well demonstrated science 100 years ago.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?