Evolutionary Fitness and Natural Selection

Spizz

Goat Botherer
Joined
Jan 19, 2009
Messages
22,975
What's the point - you are unable to understand/grasp even the basics.
All you are able to do is to heckle.
You might think of yourself as being clever/smart, but this is in fact quite typical of someone that is not so clever/smart.

Your posts are perhaps good for a laugh, but no more than that.
I suggest that you find and post on threads that are better suited to your (lack of) cognitive ability.
It’s hard to argue with your points when you don’t actually have any.
 

ToxicBunny

Honorary Master
Joined
Apr 8, 2006
Messages
80,081
What's the point - you are unable to understand/grasp even the basics.
All you are able to do is to heckle.
You might think of yourself as being clever/smart, but this is in fact quite typical of someone that is not so clever/smart.

Your posts are perhaps good for a laugh, but no more than that.
I suggest that you find and post on threads that are better suited to your (lack of) cognitive ability.
That's a laugh... I think your posts are good for more of a laugh than mine really...
 

Spizz

Goat Botherer
Joined
Jan 19, 2009
Messages
22,975
Mmmm - why are you then arguing?


I repeat - exactly what is it that you don't understand I am saying.
Be specific with your question/s.
You said...

On the face of it, the ToE seems to be logical.
Its when you start "digging", question, think, and use logic that the ToE is exposed for what it is.
Can you give some examples of something that you looked at and exposed as false?

Not a YouTube video or someone else’s writing, I mean the results of the digging that you did. Your own research. Five examples will do for now.

Thanks.
 

ToxicBunny

Honorary Master
Joined
Apr 8, 2006
Messages
80,081
You said...



Can you give some examples of something that you looked at and exposed as false?

Not a YouTube video or someone else’s writing, I mean the results of the digging that you did. Your own research. Five examples will do for now.

Thanks.
Five? Hell I'll settle for one... Just one...
 

Spizz

Goat Botherer
Joined
Jan 19, 2009
Messages
22,975
Five? Hell I'll settle for one... Just one...
I was going to say one, but that could be a rogue and not actually proof that the whole theory is flawed so we need to have a few examples. But he’s done a lot of digging and asked the hard questions, so I’m making it easy for him to mention just five.

This should be a breeze for him. He’s obviously got lots of examples otherwise it’d be pretty crazy to label the whole theory as a lie. I mean, no sane person would do such a thing if they had nothing to back it up. Would they?
 

alloytoo

Honorary Master
Joined
Sep 12, 2006
Messages
12,203
Logic.
Simple as that.

<edit>
On the face of it, the ToE seems to be logical.
Its when you start "digging", question, think, and use logic that the ToE is exposed for what it is.
TOE is the best explanation if the best explanation we have for how life changes over time.

as to the origin of life, that is not covered by TOE, Darwin specifically said that he didn't know.

Why is special pleading superior to "I don't know"?
 

Ponderer

Expert Member
Joined
Jan 8, 2019
Messages
1,230
You said...



Can you give some examples of something that you looked at and exposed as false?

Not a YouTube video or someone else’s writing, I mean the results of the digging that you did. Your own research. Five examples will do for now.

Thanks.
There be more than a few scientists that have done a lot of the so called "digging" - scientists that point out the gaping holes in the ToE - scientists that reject the ToE on scientific grounds.
But these scientists are in the minority.
The majority of scientists believe that the ToE is true, while a minor group of scientists argue that the ToE is a hoax.

Now apply Logic.
One of the groups of scientists must be wrong, or both groups must be wrong, but both groups cannot be right.
Yes?
No?
The size of (number of scientists in) the two groups has nothing to do with it.
Its the argument/s that matter.
Which group of scientists are you to believe.

Therefore, in the end, when all is said and done, it all boils down to what/who you choose to believe.

BTW
Arguments that "blast the ToE clean out of the water" are plentiful, and can quite easily be Googled.
Here's the thing.
Do you really want to find out that the ToE is a hoax, or would you rather like to believe that it is true.
 
Last edited:

Spizz

Goat Botherer
Joined
Jan 19, 2009
Messages
22,975
There be more than a few scientists that have done a lot of the so called "digging" - scientists that point out the gaping holes in the ToE - scientists that reject the ToE on scientific grounds.
But these scientists are in the minority.
The majority of scientists believe that the ToE is true, while a minor group of scientists argue that the ToE is a hoax.

Now apply Logic.
One of the groups of scientists must be wrong, or both groups must be wrong, but both groups cannot be right.
Yes?
No?
The size (number of scientists) of/in the two groups has nothing to do with it.
Its the argument/s that matter.
Which group of scientists are you to believe.

Therefore, in the end, when all is said and done, it all boils down to what/who you choose to believe.

BTW
Arguments that "blast the ToE clean out of the water" are plentiful, and can quite easily be Googled.
Here's the thing.
Do you really want to find out that the ToE is a hoax, or would you rather like to believe that it is true.
I seriously could not care less. It has no impact on my life one way or another. Really, I don’t care.

And you again, have come up with absolutely nothing when asked to present your case, which you clearly do care about and clearly do have an interest in defending.

So now, can you please present these arguments and stop pussy footing around. You keep saying you have done some digging and you have come to conclusions. Please present these examples and we can then discuss.

Otherwise the conclusions that I have come to are only about you and your vested interests in saying the theory of evolution is a hoax.

So again and to make things clear, I am open to this discussion and welcome your case. I have no vested interest and I swear to you I will read your findings with an open mind.

You say the arguments are plentiful, so you will have no problem presenting them in your own words with references.

Now put up or ffs, just shut up and move on.

Your move.
 

Ponderer

Expert Member
Joined
Jan 8, 2019
Messages
1,230
TOE is the best explanation if the best explanation we have for how life changes over time.

as to the origin of life, that is not covered by TOE, Darwin specifically said that he didn't know.

Why is special pleading superior to "I don't know"?
You argue that the ToE is the best explanation we have for how Life changes over time.

The issue is not whether or not Life changes over time.
The issue is whether or not the ToE adequately explains how the different types/kinds of Life (species/phyla) came about.
To entertain the ToE without Abiogenesis is a cop-out.
How can the ToE be the "best explanation" if it does not explain the origin of Life?
 

Pox

Expert Member
Joined
Sep 13, 2005
Messages
3,364
Lol.

Evolution is literally life changing over time. This literally gives an explanation to how different types and kinds of life develop.
 

ToxicBunny

Honorary Master
Joined
Apr 8, 2006
Messages
80,081
There be more than a few scientists that have done a lot of the so called "digging" - scientists that point out the gaping holes in the ToE - scientists that reject the ToE on scientific grounds.
But these scientists are in the minority.
The majority of scientists believe that the ToE is true, while a minor group of scientists argue that the ToE is a hoax.


Now apply Logic.
One of the groups of scientists must be wrong, or both groups must be wrong, but both groups cannot be right.
Yes?
No?
The size (number of scientists) of/in the two groups has nothing to do with it.
Its the argument/s that matter.
Which group of scientists are you to believe.

Therefore, in the end, when all is said and done, it all boils down to what/who you choose to believe.

BTW
Arguments that "blast the ToE clean out of the water" are plentiful, and can quite easily be Googled.
Here's the thing.
Do you really want to find out that the ToE is a hoax, or would you rather like to believe that it is true.
Please link to their papers then since you clearly know who they are...
 

Ponderer

Expert Member
Joined
Jan 8, 2019
Messages
1,230
I seriously could not care less. It has no impact on my life one way or another. Really, I don’t care.

And you again, have come up with absolutely nothing when asked to present your case, which you clearly do care about and clearly do have an interest in defending.

So now, can you please present these arguments and stop pussy footing around. You keep saying you have done some digging and you have come to conclusions. Please present these examples and we can then discuss.

Otherwise the conclusions that I have come to are only about you and your vested interests in saying the theory of evolution is a hoax.

So again and to make things clear, I am open to this discussion and welcome your case. I have no vested interest and I swear to you I will read your findings with an open mind.

You say the arguments are plentiful, so you will have no problem presenting them in your own words with references.

Now put up or ffs, just shut up and move on.

Your move.
You claim that you couldn't care less, but your post suggests otherwise.

For starters, I refer to post #471 - the one where I explained how the dating of fossils is fundamentally flawed - that fossils cannot scientifically be dated.
Would you like to discuss that?

BTW - who are you to tell me to "put up or shut up" huh?

Your move.
 

ToxicBunny

Honorary Master
Joined
Apr 8, 2006
Messages
80,081
You claim that you couldn't care less, but your post suggests otherwise.

For starters, I refer to post #471 - the one where I explained how the dating of fossils is fundamentally flawed - that fossils cannot scientifically be dated.
Would you like to discuss that?

BTW - who are you to tell me to "put up or shut up" huh?

Your move.
Nope, its still your move really... put up or shut up still applies to you, since you have yet to put up, and you refuse to shut up.
 

alloytoo

Honorary Master
Joined
Sep 12, 2006
Messages
12,203
You argue that the ToE is the best explanation we have for how Life changes over time.

The issue is not whether or not Life changes over time.
The issue is whether or not the ToE adequately explains how the different types/kinds of Life (species/phyla) came about.
To entertain the ToE without Abiogenesis is a cop-out.
How can the ToE be the "best explanation" if it does not explain the origin of Life?
It does not attempt to answer that question.

How something comes to exist is clearly very different to how something which already exists changes.

Why are you afraid of "we don't know?"

Why do you feel the need to introduce a special pleading?
 

Spizz

Goat Botherer
Joined
Jan 19, 2009
Messages
22,975
You claim that you couldn't care less, but your post suggests otherwise.

For starters, I refer to post #471 - the one where I explained how the dating of fossils is fundamentally flawed - that fossils cannot scientifically be dated.
Would you like to discuss that?

BTW - who are you to tell me to "put up or shut up" huh?

Your move.
I’m the guy asking you to back up your nonsense. But of course you can’t can you? You have nothing except your unsubstantiated beliefs.

Nothing.

Nada.

Nicks nie.

Fokal.

And still you trot on, convinced in your own head and noway to prove any of it to anyone who asks.

You have produced nothing.

Nothing.

Nada.

Nicks nie.

Fokal.
 

Spizz

Goat Botherer
Joined
Jan 19, 2009
Messages
22,975
Oh, and accurately measuring the dates of fossils using radiocarbon dating proves nothing about the ToE either way.

Whether it is accurate or not is another debate. A few decades or centuries is irrelevant and has nothing to do with the theory of evolution.
 

Ponderer

Expert Member
Joined
Jan 8, 2019
Messages
1,230
It does not attempt to answer that question.

How something comes to exist is clearly very different to how something which already exists changes.

Why are you afraid of "we don't know?"

Why do you feel the need to introduce a special pleading?
I am not afraid of "I don't know".
There be a great many things that I don't know.
It's a case of knowing the things that I am capable of knowing (able to know).

The "special pleading" thing - the belief that GOD created everything (the Universe and Life) from absolutely nothing.
Consider the Big Bang theory and the theory of Evolution - that the Universe created itself from almost (but not) nothing, and that Life arose spontaneously (by chance).
Atheists will gravitate towards the one "special pleading", while Theists will gravitate towards the other "special pleading".
Now tell me which of the two "special pleadings" be more "special".
In the end, it boils down to what/who you choose to believe.
And that is why Science must only/purely be Science.
 

Pox

Expert Member
Joined
Sep 13, 2005
Messages
3,364
I am not afraid of "I don't know".
There be a great many things that I don't know.
It's a case of knowing the things that I am capable of knowing (able to know).

The "special pleading" thing - the belief that GOD created everything (the Universe and Life) from absolutely nothing.
Consider the Big Bang theory and the theory of Evolution - that the Universe created itself from almost (but not) nothing, and that Life arose spontaneously (by chance).
Atheists will gravitate towards the one "special pleading", while Theists will gravitate towards the other "special pleading".
Now tell me which of the two "special pleadings" be more "special".
In the end, it boils down to what/who you choose to believe.
And that is why Science must only/purely be Science.
Please stop conflating evolution and the origin of life. Every chance you get you do so.

It's disingenuous at best and outright lying at worst.
 
Top