What proof would you need? (2)

Astridhere · Jan 14, 2012

CabVet said:
Astridhere, you keep repeating the sentence above in all of your posts. How about you show us some evidence for a change?

P.S.: Falsifying 1 million other scientific theories is not evidence to support yours.

Oh boy..don't ask why I have to keep repeating myself, you are one reason...

have you ever heard this recently...

Human knucklewalking ancestry shoved down creationists throats for over 150 years only to be falsified recently.

Junk DNA shoved down creationists creationists throats in ridicule against Gods design, falsified with the discovery of functional non coding dna.

Single fossil finds turning current thinking on its head eg Ardi.

Evolutionary researchers and models not predicting the huge difference in the chimp/human Y chromosome. TOE has no predictive capability but is chaotic, homoplasic, convergent and parallel and basically all over the place.

These are a few and all that are required to demonstrate that what you have cannot be worse than what any of the creationist, sites you never read or cannot understand, have to say.

Every post you put up is really silly, ignorant and time wasting. You just keep asking for the same information over and over without refuting it, or your playing the fool unable to discern creationist sites from not, or your calling me a liar with nothing more than hot air behind it or pictures you cannot speak to.

You do the same on many threads. You are incapable of articulating any point. You are more like a mosquito buzzing around.

CabVet · Jan 14, 2012

Astridhere said:
Oh boy..don't ask why I have to keep repeating myself, you are one reason...

have you ever heard this recently...

Human knucklewalking ancestry shoved down creationists throats for over 150 years only to be falsified recently.

Junk DNA shoved down creationists creationists throats in ridicule against Gods design, falsified with the discovery of functional non coding dna.

Single fossil finds turning current thinking on its head eg Ardi.

Evolutionary researchers and models not predicting the huge difference in the chimp/human Y chromosome. TOE has no predictive capability but is chaotic, homoplasic, convergent and parallel and basically all over the place.

These are a few and all that are required to demonstrate that what you have cannot be worse than what any of the creationist, sites you never read or cannot understand, have to say.

Every post you put up is really silly, ignorant and time wasting. You just keep asking for the same information over and over without refuting it, or your playing the fool unable to discern creationist sites from not, or your calling me a liar with nothing more than hot air behind it or pictures you cannot speak to.

You do the same on many threads. You are incapable of articulating any point. You are more like a mosquito buzzing around.

Nothing you present is evidence for divine creation. It seems that you don't understand my question even given how many times I repeated it.

Astridhere · Jan 14, 2012

USincognito said:
You think a lot of things and all of them have proven to be wrong, so who cares?

I deny I have got anything important wrong. My interpretations are just as good as yours. However, evos have got plenty wrong also. I am not playing the creationists are better card here. I am playing the creationists cannot be worse than evolutionists card. This is sufficient to demonstate that evolutionists ridicule of creationists is unjustified and fanatical woffle. We do not have to prove we are better, we just have to demonstrate that you lot are shockers and hence we cannot be worse.

Your bizarre obsession with "curved fingers" doesn't detract from the point I have made and you simply cannot refute. Au. ape men basal features in no way change the fact that they also exhibit derived features of descendant ape men including H. sapiens ape men. The foramen magnum is that of a biped and the pelvis is midway between a chimp and a modern ape man H. sapiens. The hands and feet don't change this fact.

Well Ardi-like demonstrates that the common ancestor likely did not have a pelvis like a chimp at all. So to me a chimp-like pelvis would demonstrate a fossil that belongs in the chimp ancestry line and after the split according to evos. I keep telling you chimp like is out. My interpretation is as good as yours in saying Ardi and Lucy are likely ape and gorilla ancestors therefore your traits are a misleading straw grab in desperation.

The fossil puts to rest the notion, popular since Darwin's time, that a chimpanzee-like missing link—resembling something between humans and today's apes—would eventually be found at the root of the human family tree. Indeed, the new evidence suggests that the study of chimpanzee anatomy and behavior—long used to infer the nature of the earliest human ancestors—is largely irrelevant to understanding our beginnings.
Ardi instead shows an unexpected mix of advanced characteristics and of primitive traits seen in much older apes that were unlike chimps or gorillas
Oldest Skeleton of Human Ancestor Found

THE GIST

Some anthropologists argue that Ardi and a couple other fossil creatures are really just apes, not human ancestors.

Human-like traits including small teeth and upright stance in apes may have mislead researchers.

Human Ancestors Have Identity Crisis : Discovery News

Human Ancestors Have Identity Crisis[bless and do not curse]||[bless and do not curse]CASHP

You wish to cherry pick out of many evo researchers theories. 'Current knowledge and majority accepted' means little as it changes all the time with just one fossil. I too may cherry pick. I say and can support Ardi and Lucy being the ancestors of chimps or gorillas, with or without Dawkins. Therefore reduced pelvis mean nothing and are demonstrated in an ape to ape transition, as is all the other humanity you attributed to them. Bipedalism is not a human trait, it can be traced back 20my. I have no problem with apes being bipeds before the fall, I am just skeptical to say the least of any of your assumptions. So my theory means none of the traits you mentioned really mean anything by way of humanity.

So no ancestors to humanity, a few more fossils to add to the missing chimp and gorilla ancestors and a few more hiding in erectus.

My theory or anyones theory or interpretations cannot be worse than your mess and 150 years of falsifications and failed predictions.

I have no idea what you're talking about regarding this quote as your comment appears to have nothing to do with what Dawkins said in a 20 year old OpEd. He suggests nothing of the sort regarding the hominan line (where he does suggest there is a seemless transition) and in fact notes there are not chimpanzee transitionals found at the time. How your failure of reading comprehension led you to believe that tiny quote suggested "a nice transition down the chimp side" is beyond me, though typical for your inablity to understand what you have actually read.
Then why does he use a perhaps. Regardless I can still back my assertions with other evo research. I don't need to as creationist research is no worse than yours. But I have used your researchers that also back a point in principle, giving me even a stronger stance. The only difference being your evo researchers provide another evo story because they are stuck on 'it all evolved', regardless of endless falsifications and contradiction eg Orang/chimp/human, homoplasy, convergence, etc.

So you see you have no better than stories to offer like I do and as other creationists do.

I am playing the yours is no better than mine card here. I do not have to put up any more than your changing stories really based on likely and perhaps.

You evos pretend that what you can offer as flavour of the month is more substantiated or credible (let alone plausible) than creationists suppositions and interpretations. This is a lie.

That does not mean you should change your stance. It does mean that your ridiculing creationists is a baseless self gratifying passtime, and a reflection of fanaticism and denial in atheists that haunt religious forums.

Fastener · Jan 14, 2012

Fastener said:
When new facts come to light what would you have scientists do ignore those facts? if you came up with a brand new type of microscope that magnified a hundred times better than the microscopes we have now what should we do with the new evidence we get from it? ignore that evidence?

When the calculator was invented people were doing math just because they were curious about the answers,
the calculator could do in ten button presses what would have taken ten people working for a week to accomplish.

What do you suggest we do with all of the new information we are getting from the Hubble telescope ignore it?
as time moves on so does the amount of information we accumulate our knowledge base increases ten fold with every generation.
The more we know the more we are able to know, would you have us stop finding things out?

Astridhere... could you please tell me where you stand on new information?

Keachian · Jan 14, 2012

Astridhere said:
Oh boy..don't ask why I have to keep repeating myself, you are one reason...

have you ever heard this recently...

Human knucklewalking ancestry shoved down creationists throats for over 150 years only to be falsified recently.

Junk DNA shoved down creationists creationists throats in ridicule against Gods design, falsified with the discovery of functional non coding dna.

Single fossil finds turning current thinking on its head eg Ardi.

Evolutionary researchers and models not predicting the huge difference in the chimp/human Y chromosome. TOE has no predictive capability but is chaotic, homoplasic, convergent and parallel and basically all over the place.

These are a few and all that are required to demonstrate that what you have cannot be worse than what any of the creationist, sites you never read or cannot understand, have to say.

Every post you put up is really silly, ignorant and time wasting. You just keep asking for the same information over and over without refuting it, or your playing the fool unable to discern creationist sites from not, or your calling me a liar with nothing more than hot air behind it or pictures you cannot speak to.

You do the same on many threads. You are incapable of articulating any point. You are more like a mosquito buzzing around.

No matter how many times you trot out your objections to the theory of evolution, you have yet to show that you can substantiate any of your claims and therefore have no leg to stand on.

Astridhere · Jan 14, 2012

Fastener said:
Astridhere... could you please tell me where you stand on new information?

New information either supports a current theory/story/hypothesis/paradigm or it does not. There are 4 sides to new information there is data supplied and how that was arrived at and then the interpretation of that data and lastly its' plausibility and parsinomy. The constuct of the four brings about what I believe you call new information either of which side can be and has been false. That is OK because I am not claiming creation is better in making my point. However it cannot be any worse than demonstrations of single fossils finds overturning any current story/hypothesis/theory etc.

It cannot be worse than the contradiction of orang morphology being more similar to mankind contradicting DNA comparisons.

New information is exactly what ends up in falsified shatters in time to come. My thought is new informtion based on a false assumption, ie TOE, will continue to falsify itself over time. Where as the more research you provide although biased still often supports creation better than it does evolution. I think creationist stances are better because I see the raw data aligning with creation and requiring many non plausible scenarios from you guys to turn the observed into a myth. However I am not playing the better card. I am playing that my and other creationist theories at least cannot be worse than yours card.

So again I say that creationist assertions, paradigms and interpretations cannot possibly be worse than your new information, or rather flavour of the month, or any support you provide. Creationists do not have to provide better or more substantiated theories than evos to demonstrate the ridicule of creationists by evolutionists is baseless and biased.

Keachian · Jan 14, 2012

Shutter said:
In other words you are just another thick creationists who knows nothing about evolution but because you are a creationist you think it's your duty to pass on the garbage you have been taught to believe by the people who play you.

Promise me you will remain in the US because they have nutters around every corner over there and they know how to handle the likes of you.

She's an Aussie, not that that says much anyway, for some reason some Aussie Christians look to America for spiritual guidance,

Notedstrangeperson · Jan 14, 2012

Shutter said:
In other words you are just another thick creationists who knows nothing about evolution but because you are a creationist you think it's your duty to pass on the garbage you have been taught to believe by the people who play you.

Promise me you will remain in the US because they have nutters around every corner over there and they know how to handle the likes of you.

You have two posts and both of them insult other users. If you continue doing that you won't last very long here.

Orogeny · Jan 14, 2012

Notedstrangeperson said:
You have two posts and both of them insult other users. If you continue doing that you won't last very long here.

, she said to Consol's 103rd weekly sock puppet.

Keachian · Jan 14, 2012

Orogeny said:
, she said to Consol's 103rd weekly sock puppet.

how can you tell?

Notedstrangeperson · Jan 14, 2012

Shutter said:
You must be one of the new people, consol calls nuts cases nuts cases.

BZZZ! Wrong answer!
The correct answer was "Consol? Who's Consol?"

mathclub · Jan 14, 2012

Shutter said:
I forgot they have creationist crazies over there as well in fact a lot of them went to the states because of the numb nuts are plentiful over there.

I see a crazy religious person and I picture the stars and stripes wrapped around them, sorry.

yeah, we sent Ray Comfort from New Zealand over to live in America where he is much more at home.

Please keep him.

Orogeny · Jan 14, 2012

progmonk said:
how can you tell?

He's belligerent and constantly violates forum rules. He mocks creationists for not understanding evolution, yet has never demonstrated any knowledge of his own (in fact, at one point he even said he had never studied evolution). He constantly makes xenophobic comments about the US. He has never, ever contributed to the content of a thread.

If a poster displays any combination of these traits, has a low post count, and refers to other posters as if he's interacted with them before, you can be 100% certain it's Consol.

ETA: Oh, and he calls nutcases nutcases.

Orogeny · Jan 14, 2012

I like it that you don't even pretend to not be violating forum rules.

Astridhere · Jan 14, 2012

Shutter said:
In other words you are just another thick creationists who knows nothing about evolution but because you are a creationist you think it's your duty to pass on the garbage you have been taught to believe by the people who play you.

Promise me you will remain in the US because they have nutters around every corner over there and they know how to handle the likes of you.

Darls, nothing that you said saves your 150 years of falsification.

Simply offering hot air and an opinion does not stand up at all.

I have offered an unfalsifiable theory as other creationists do and as you do. I have provided supportive research from your own.

To call me a nutter and offering no refute to my assertion really only demonstrates you are one of those sheep that follow blindly with nothing really to say except Baaa.

You have a theory in evolution with no predictive ability eg human/chimp Y chromosome, yet you are prepared to moch creationists. You are desperate and unable to elevate your theory from the mire and hence are prepared to stoop to ridicule, asides, hot air and heaps of baa.

Your Ardi and Lucy with all their humanity are apes. Suck it up, because some evo researchers agree in principle, as demonstrated with more than the hot air you have offered. I am as entitled to cherry pick my research as you lot are, ignoring what is uncomfortable for you.

You lot have tooted your horn many times and shovelled what you reckon only an idiot would not accept down creationists throats, only to find that same evidence thrown into the great garbage bin of evolutionary delusions past.

Creationists assertions and interpretations simply could be no worse than evos mess, change and contradiction, with one single fossil overturning over 150 years of thought.

You do not have to like it. However that is the way it is.

Atheists haunt religious forums because they are fanatical and get cheap jollies pretending they have more substantiation to offer than creationists. Indeed your latest theory of human evolution, after the last was falsified with Ardi, is less than 10 years old, published in 2009, and replaced 150 years of human knuckle walking ancesty in a single find.

This does not mean you should go change your view. However it does mean you evos should perhaps pull your head in.

Belk · Jan 15, 2012

Astridhere said:
Darls, nothing that you said saves your 150 years of falsification.

Simply offering hot air and an opinion does not stand up at all.

I have offered an unfalsifiable theory as other creationists do and as you do. I have provided supportive research from your own.

To call me a nutter and offering no refute to my assertion really only demonstrates you are one of those sheep that follow blindly with nothing really to say except Baaa.

You have a theory in evolution with no predictive ability eg human/chimp Y chromosome, yet you are prepared to moch creationists. You are desperate and unable to elevate your theory from the mire and hence are prepared to stoop to ridicule, asides, hot air and heaps of baa.

Your Ardi and Lucy with all their humanity are apes. Suck it up, because some evo researchers agree in principle, as demonstrated with more than the hot air you have offered. I am as entitled to cherry pick my research as you lot are, ignoring what is uncomfortable for you.

You lot have tooted your horn many times and shovelled what you reckon only an idiot would not accept down creationists throats, only to find that same evidence thrown into the great garbage bin of evolutionary delusions past.

Creationists assertions and interpretations simply could be no worse than evos mess, change and contradiction, with one single fossil overturning over 150 years of thought.

You do not have to like it. However that is the way it is.

Atheists haunt religious forums because they are fanatical and get cheap jollies pretending they have more substantiation to offer than creationists. Indeed your latest theory of human evolution, after the last was falsified with Ardi, is less than 10 years old, published in 2009, and replaced 150 years of human knuckle walking ancesty in a single find.

This does not mean you should go change your view. However it does mean you evos should perhaps pull your head in.

Yeah yeah. Let us know when you have won your Nobel prize for the creationist theory of biology.

Astridhere · Jan 15, 2012

Belk said:
Yeah yeah. Let us know when you have won your Nobel prize for the creationist theory of biology.

Woffle again I see. Let me know when you have something intelligent to add.

Darls, nothing that you said saves your 150 years of falsification.

Simply offering ridicule, hot air and an opinion does not stand up at all, but rather demonstrates your desperation.

I have offered an unfalsifiable theory as other creationists do and as you do. I have provided supportive research from your own.

Offering no refute to my assertions really only demonstrates you are one of those sheep that follow blindly with nothing really to say except Baaa.

You have a theory in evolution with no predictive ability eg human/chimp Y chromosome, yet you are prepared to moch creationists. You are desperate and unable to elevate your theory from the mire and hence are prepared to stoop to ridicule, asides, hot air and heaps of baa.

Your Ardi and Lucy with all their humanity are apes. Suck it up, because some evo researchers agree in principle, as demonstrated with more than the hot air you have offered. I am as entitled to cherry pick my research as you lot are, ignoring what is uncomfortable for you.

You lot have tooted your horn many times and shovelled what you reckon only an idiot would not accept down creationists throats, only to find that same evidence thrown into the great garbage bin of evolutionary delusions past.

Creationists assertions and interpretations simply could be no worse than evos mess, change and contradiction, with one single fossil overturning over 150 years of thought.

You do not have to like it. However that is the way it is.

Atheists haunt religious forums because they are fanatical and get cheap jollies pretending they have more substantiation to offer than creationists. Indeed your latest theory of human evolution, after the last was falsified with Ardi, is less than 10 years old, published in 2009, and replaced 150 years of human knuckle walking ancesty in a single find.

This does not mean you should go change your view. However it does mean you evos should perhaps pull your head in.

Belk · Jan 15, 2012

Astridhere said:
Woffle again I see. Let me know when you have something intelligent to add.

Darls, nothing that you said saves your 150 years of falsification.

Simply offering hot air and an opinion does not stand up at all.

I have offered an unfalsifiable theory as other creationists do and as you do. I have provided supportive research from your own.

To call me a nutter and offering no refute to my assertion really only demonstrates you are one of those sheep that follow blindly with nothing really to say except Baaa.

You have a theory in evolution with no predictive ability eg human/chimp Y chromosome, yet you are prepared to moch creationists. You are desperate and unable to elevate your theory from the mire and hence are prepared to stoop to ridicule, asides, hot air and heaps of baa.

Your Ardi and Lucy with all their humanity are apes. Suck it up, because some evo researchers agree in principle, as demonstrated with more than the hot air you have offered. I am as entitled to cherry pick my research as you lot are, ignoring what is uncomfortable for you.

You lot have tooted your horn many times and shovelled what you reckon only an idiot would not accept down creationists throats, only to find that same evidence thrown into the great garbage bin of evolutionary delusions past.

Creationists assertions and interpretations simply could be no worse than evos mess, change and contradiction, with one single fossil overturning over 150 years of thought.

You do not have to like it. However that is the way it is.

Atheists haunt religious forums because they are fanatical and get cheap jollies pretending they have more substantiation to offer than creationists. Indeed your latest theory of human evolution, after the last was falsified with Ardi, is less than 10 years old, published in 2009, and replaced 150 years of human knuckle walking ancesty in a single find.

This does not mean you should go change your view. However it does mean you evos should perhaps pull your head in.

You first. Got that Nobel prize yet? Should be easy since we have no evidence right?

Astridhere · Jan 15, 2012

Belk your desperation is showing.

If Darwin or any other evo won a Nobel Prize for proving or supporting human knucklewalking ancestry, they would be proven to be a shmook as well as an idiot.

What creationists present can be no worse than what evos present.

CabVet · Jan 15, 2012

Astridhere said:
Creationists assertions and interpretations simply could be no worse than evos mess, change and contradiction, with one single fossil overturning over 150 years of thought.

Very interesting, you keep repeating this, and I came to the following conclusion:

1) Since creationists assertions are based on nothing and scientific asserions are based on data, you have a complete lack of understanding of what science is when you compare creationism to evolution. There are at least 50 posts here of people asking you to show a single shred of evidence for creationism, yet you showed none, zero, zilch.

2) You show a complete lack of faith. Most creationists I know (AV is a prime example) will simply completely dismiss science and say that what they have is the only explanation. You not only say the creationist version is not the only one, but you also say that it is no worse than evolution.

What proof would you need? (2)

Well-Known Member

Question everything

Well-Known Member

Fastener

Guest

On Sabbatical

Well-Known Member

On Sabbatical

Well-Known Member

Trilobite me!

On Sabbatical

Well-Known Member

Newbie

Trilobite me!

Trilobite me!

Well-Known Member

Senior Member

Well-Known Member

Senior Member

Well-Known Member

Question everything

Similar threads

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency