Rejecting evolution with science...

Off topic

Evolution amazes me more everyday! I watched wildest Africa the other day and some fish flips itself out the water to find a new stream :eek:
 
Off topic

Evolution amazes me more everyday! I watched wildest Africa the other day and some fish flips itself out the water to find a new stream :eek:

That's a learned behaviour, not necessarily evolution, although developmental plasticity and neuroplasticity are interesting points of discussion in this respect...
 
Hey :mad:! That was my testy, looney self back in the day :o.
Crikey but you have had a lot of clones over the years.,, weren't you Teleological too?... you almost seemed to be talking to yourself in that thread. :p

Definitely prefer the new Techne to the old. You are far more chilled these days :)
 
Personally I know evolution is fact, the evidence is compelling. However, common ancestry from a single cell to the diverse forms of life today? Nobody can prove that, doesn't matter how many science degrees you have. It's easy to start with an idea and then manipulate your "evidence" to support the idea.
You admit this yet you claim it can't possibly be my reason for rejecting it. I don't get that.

Thank you, glad you brought this up. A scientific theory is the best possible explanation of ...../pls complete
But is the best explanation necessarily good? Telkom arguably has the best broadband in the country. Do you see where such criteria ultimately goes?

Here is what Wiki has to say: "A scientific theory is a well-substantiated explanation of some aspect of the natural world, based on a body of knowledge that has been repeatedly confirmed through observation and experiment."
Yet not all theories are well substantiated. I think you must have been warned before that wiki isn't very good at facts, in fact it's bad.

Like I said we need to stop entertaining it. The guy keeps arguing that the scientific evidence is against the theory of evolution. He is being given an opportunity to support that claim now and instead he is trolling the lot of us and we are letting him get away with it.
Well it is a trolling thread.

WTF is wrong with you?
He cannot give answers for questions for which he say he does, instead he spurts out nonsense.
I'm afraid you do not understand the answers. Also called speaking in tongues. Not because I'm trying to confuse you but because you don't have the ability to understand it. If you (DJ) saw the fallacies in your own statement you wouldn't ask in the first place but you don't because it's already second nature to you.

Lol :D

So there is some hope for Swa and his cronies.
There isn't for you and yours though. ;)
 
Yet not all theories are well substantiated. I think you must have been warned before that wiki isn't very good at facts, in fact it's bad.

Swa, you don't even understand the Theory of Evolution, so please go educate yourself before you think to argue things you have no idea about.

Frankly, I'm embarrassed for you and for the fact that you can't even see how much damage you're doing to your argument and religion. If the best means of 'disproving' evolution for you is to discredit the research and the supporters, then I'm sorry, but your arguments hold no grounds as that is a logical fallacy. Come back when you can disprove evolution with facts, not insults.
 
Swa, you don't even understand the Theory of Evolution, so please go educate yourself before you think to argue things you have no idea about.

Frankly, I'm embarrassed for you and for the fact that you can't even see how much damage you're doing to your argument and religion. If the best means of 'disproving' evolution for you is to discredit the research and the supporters, then I'm sorry, but your arguments hold no grounds as that is a logical fallacy. Come back when you can disprove evolution with facts, not insults.
What about the origin of life? More specifically the origin of information embedded in DNA. Neither chemical nor biological evolution has been able to explain the specific order of amino acids related to the specific function of the particular protein.
 
I think this question is in essence a huge problem for evolutionary scientists because the Darwinist theory of evolution completely falls apart because of it.
 
I think this question is in essence a huge problem for evolutionary scientists because the Darwinist theory of evolution completely falls apart because of it.
You mean the question about the origins of life and where DNA came from?

That question has nothing to do with evolution. You have had this explained to you more times than I can count. Continuing to confuse the issue at this point is simply unacceptable.

Why do you creationists battle with this simple concept? ABIOGENESIS ISN'T PART OF THE THEORY OF EVOLUTION.

It doesn't matter if a deity exists and it created the first unit of life capable of passing on inheritable traits to the next generation. That doesn't affect how evolution occurs. Jesus Christ on a stick Ekstasis it isn't like you have a learning disability, why can't you get this? Why do you keep repeating the same garbage over and over despite being corrected and pointed to the resources that explain it to you?
 
Last edited:
I'm afraid you do not understand the answers

Of course I don't understand your answer. I asked for your evidence that science disproves evolution and you replied by stating that you're glad I don't beat my wife any longer.

Fsck you! Really! Fsck you!

If you had even the smallest comprehension of the schit I've been through you'd probably think twice before posting such bullschit.

Seriously. Fsck you. You'd better hope [edited out]...
 
Last edited:
Top
Sign up to the MyBroadband newsletter
X