Why can't we fly?

Status
Not open for further replies.

nyjbarnes

Well-Known Member
Aug 19, 2004
436
6
44
Lawrence, KS
✟598.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Mistermystery said:
Multiple people have asked him to define evolution.
I believe I have, I just get tired of being told I don't understand the latest rendition of evolution.

W81minit was talking about how when the results of a hypothesis aren't acheived aren't we supposed to pitch the hypothesis (alluded to)

And the answer he got by all the evolutionists was "no" just modify the rules where by we achieve our result....seemed circular.

Anyways, I don't like being berated by some person standing on anothers knowledge of biology and being told I don't understand evolution. I think it's poor debate.

For the final time I will define evolution.

Evolution as it has been taught to me is:

The belief that there is a common ancestry between all organisms and that (combining scientific theories here) our origins were in single celled organisms. Most outwardly predictable in ape to man evolution.

Trite oversimplification would be that one organism through mutation and natural selection begets another organism. This organism is completely separate from the original.
 
Upvote 0

Mistermystery

Here's looking at you kid
Apr 19, 2004
4,220
169
✟5,275.00
Faith
Atheist
nyjbarnes said:
I believe I have, blah blah blah
have you read the thread? Let me recap:

Peter Wilkins: "Hello! I am here to make a pratt-like statement about evolution, but form this statement in such a way it seems like a genuine question!"
Notto: "Hello Peter, I have an explaination here, if you have any other questions, please ask them"
Phantomlama: "I've got an explaination as well"
Sanguine: "Ditto"
Irish: "yo"
Logic: "sup?"
(some other responces later)
---
Peter Wilkins: "Well I'm not convinced. So I make a strawman statement about evolution. Look I grow wings now, Lol stoopid evolutionists".
(nonsense replies basically, some where good though, jus not very good)
Peter: "I just am not convinced"
Me: "Well what would you like to hear? our physyology is uncapable of doing it now, just like others have explained, what part do you need to be clearified on?"
Peter: "Let's test it on animals lol"
Notto: (clearly being fed up with the guy who ignores him) don't use strawmen responces.
jet: "what is it that you want then?, Here's an other explaination: *snip* "
Peter: "feathers couldn't have been formed fully"
Jet: "they didn't, it looked prolly like plushe"
Data: "an other explaination on the op"
Peter: "nope, I am still not convinced, because it was randomness"
Jet: "What are your problems with it then??"
Peter: "I go on and make an other strawman again, and while I'm at it let's make fun of abiogenesis again."
Jet: "okay recap. this is a strawman, and this is why it doesn't work"
Peter: "oooooh.... Well then evolution is a strawman"
*collectivly sigh*

Notto: "Look, here you are going on again about your version of evolution, I suggest you study about it"
Peter: "I have researched evolution SO MUCH, and it's stupid"
Jet: "Ridiculous, unless you got all your info from a creationist site who is deliberatly decieving you, this is a false witness. please tell me what evolution means"
Logic: "yeah what is so riddiculous, can you give us a definition??"
Notto: "doesn't really seem like it"
Peter: "lolz you = funnayh"
I'm sorry that we were allllllll sooooooo very wrong ehre, but I got fed up with this stuff after he ignored Notto'sfirst post. Instead of debating the issue he .. walked off. but still kept posting. Posting things like "Nearly every biologist on the planet is wrong" WELL, that's some good evidence! boy howdy!

Sorry If I asked him to what evolution was, but I think it was trivial in the end part of the... "debate". And if I were you I would read the thread agin. Not all, but some are very good responces why it's stupid that men should have wings.
 
Upvote 0
Status
Not open for further replies.