Rejecting evolution with science...

OrbitalDawn said:
What science does ID use?
Click to expand...

imagesbooger.gif


If nothing else, they're admirably consistent.
 
Ekstasis said:
As an African American, I think y'all should just chill out :p

I think what Swa is ultimately trying to convey is that Evolutionary science itself rejects evolution because much of it is not science but speculation based on what "we think we're seeing". The holes are everywhere from the BB and abiogenesis right into evolution.

I would also like to urge you to explain what evolution you are referring to - it's a very broad term. "Evolution is a fact" is not an argument, we know it is. However, evolution from a common ancestral cell into the abundance of life as we see around us is hypothetical. Science cannot test for that. "Overwhelming evidence" is an outright lie. It's more like overwhelming speculation.
Click to expand...


dear god
 
AlmightyBender said:
I'm sure they could effectively communicate, but what about recording that? The reason that there is no history is because there was no writing, no written language. There was also the problem of what exactly you were supposed to write these things on and still be able to transport it in your nomadic lifestyle (no agriculture remember ;) ). Stone tablets? Animal hides? Not a chance, way too heavy and bulky so even if you had writing what would the point be?

Then all of a sudden Egyptians start making basic paper scrolls and boom: recorded history starts. Also you are completely ignoring Eastern Asia where they started recording history long before the Western culture. Do they not count? Like I said you really should go visit your local library sometime.
Click to expand...
And the same questions arise. Why would they be content with not having writing? Logic dictates that where there is a need to record knowledge a way to do so would be invented. Did the Egyptians just randomly discover papyrus? Did we just happen on to tree pulp, the print press, magnetic, optical, and holographic media as well? No these were all discovered as we seek to expand our knowledge starting from stone and clay tablets. I don't think you're properly considering it to suggest that stone age people were happy to use such crude methods for tens of thousands of years. We call them stone age not because they were dumb and uninquisitive but because they started of with stone tools.

HapticSimian said:
Honestly, have you even bothered to look at the wiki article on evidence of common descent? I know you've been supplied the link a few times. And don't pull the standard painted-into-a-corner cop-out of wiki being unreliable... there are 161 references for you to follow at the bottom of the article.
Click to expand...
Again a lot of speculation it seems. In that video that was posted before the evolutionist could only show 3 possible lines of descent. He claimed he can show 4 but didn't bring the other one with him. Still a pretty unremarkable feat when common descent needs millions of lines of descent. When this lack of evidence, which incidentally is still under dispute among evolutionists themselves, was pointed out he was speechless and they changed the subject, ended the debate, and claimed the reason for their gathering was for the other side to prove their case. That's after their own case was thoroughly dismantled. Also see what I wrote to Copacetic about the common descent argument.

HapticSimian said:
As for ID... it's bunk, and it will remain bunk because its very premise is untestable. To assert that it is on equal footing with evolutionary theory is patently absurd, and indicative of deficient mental faculties. The only question you need to answer for yourself is whether you're satisfied with your mental deficiency being permanent - the information that'll fix it is out there if you'd care to look.
Click to expand...
Then evolutionary "theory" is bunk as its very premise is untestable. Still with the double standards I see. You're right though that it's not on equal footing with evolution, it's way more substantial and it's only been around for a few decades. Yes the information is out there, but people with only one acceptable possibility in their mind can't look at it without blinders. Too bad you'll keep going through life like that unless you see some of the light.

Unhappy438 said:
Stop spewing nonsense , common descent is testable.
Click to expand...
It is? How? Can't wait for this little gem. :D

porchrat said:
The Theory of Evolution is testable and continues to be tested all the fscking time. Every new discover further tests it.

See this is why you shouldn't read these retarded creationist blogs. It makes you believe crazy things.
Click to expand...
And with every test it fails. Still though you are not prepared to give it up because it's not about evidence but first and foremost about faith. Yeah stop reading those retarded talkorigins blogs.

porchrat said:
You can test for common descent through genetics. If the genetics don't line up then common descent is falsified.Say for example if you found some life that doesn't use the nucleic acid system all life on this planet discovered so far uses. Unfortunately for you that hasn't happened yet.
Click to expand...
Common descent falsified then. Can we move on to the next subject now?

porchrat said:
It won't grow because it isn't science, it is religion ineffectually attempting to disguise itself as science.
Click to expand...
You should also read this

HapticSimian said:
Of course common descent can be tested for - organisms thought to be related would show signs of interrelatedness, on a scale from the genetic to the structural. This is borne out by evolutionary biology. What you, and others like you, fail to get is that what we see around us makes sense only either in the light of evolution, or of something like Last Thursdayism. As the latter is patently absurd, we focus on the former.
Click to expand...
No, it also makes sense if it was created in stages or if decay rates aren't constant. I want you to answer the same question posed to Copacetic, what experiment did you do to rule both out and confirm that a pattern will only be present with common descent?

porchrat said:
and if abiogenesis and the BB are both utter schit and your deity magicked up the first unit of reproducible life then evolution can STILL HAPPEN AND DOESN'T NEED TO BE TOSSED. Happy? Go throw out whatever it is you are eating that makes you so incapable of comprehending something so simple.
Click to expand...
Again I want you to answer the question I asked you before, what's stopping Him from going all the way? You're avoiding the issue of abiogenesis because it has been shown as bunk and without it there's no reason only a single cell must be created and not whole organisms in which case evolution is bunk.
 
Swa said:
This message is hidden because Swa is on your ignore list.
Click to expand...

I'm glad you're beginning to see the folly of your ways. Good thing there are easily accessible sources like... yes... the talkorigins archive where pretty much each and every single thing you've parroted on this forum since your arrival is handily collated and debunked. 'Cause **** knows, it's not as if you've brought anything new to the table.

Doesn't it just grate your nuts that people have grown weary of your non-stop bollocks?
 
abandonallhope said:
So if evolution is true, why don't we see any of these walking around ?? :
http://oi46.tinypic.com/2vl87i9.jpg
http://oi49.tinypic.com/1zbfp11.jpg
Click to expand...

porchrat said:
If we saw those walking around evolution would probably be falsified.

Having seen this I can only conclude that you are either ignorant of what exactly evolution is or you are trolling. Which is it?
Click to expand...

It does emphatically prove one thing though; Kirk Cameron is a massive tool.
 
abandonallhope said:
So if evolution is true, why don't we see any of these walking around ?? :
http://oi46.tinypic.com/2vl87i9.jpg
http://oi49.tinypic.com/1zbfp11.jpg
Click to expand...

Im really growing weary of this type of trolling and it makes me seriously consider taking a hiatus from this forum. If you honestly think that is some kind of evidence disproving evolution then you haven't got the slightest clue what evolution is all about.

On a side note , what ever happened to the report function?
 
HapticSimian said:
I'm glad you're beginning to see the folly of your ways. Good thing there are easily accessible sources like... yes... the talkorigins archive where pretty much each and every single thing you've parroted on this forum since your arrival is handily collated and debunked. 'Cause **** knows, it's not as if you've brought anything new to the table.

Doesn't it just grate your nuts that people have grown weary of your non-stop bollocks?
Click to expand...

Are you really that proud you put someone on ignore ?

How fragile are you ?

:D
 
abandonallhope said:
Like you would ever be able to do that.
Click to expand...

I dont see why not , i can easily full my life with other distractions if im no longer enjoying myself here.

P.S - At least you didn't denying your flat out trolling and continue with your monkey frog idea. There is some hope yet.
 
Swa said:
You really think I am here to persuade YOU?


Let me explain a few things to you:

When languages started they developed rather quickly and we have thousands of them in only a few millennia. When a 1 year old child learns language they don't do it with their parents feeding them the meaning of every word. They hear the words and associate their meaning by picking up on the actions. They are able to do this so quickly through intellect.

We have a history of 6,000 years showing carts and sailing. People were not living isolated lives back then. From there we have a gradual development to what we have today but guess what no history for tens of thousands of years before that. Now what you want us to believe is that despite having this intellect that even a baby possesses for at least 45,000 years before this explosion of development people were content to live without a means to effectively communicate?
Click to expand...

So what are you saying? Are you saying that if we drop 100 babies on an isolated island with no contact with the outside world then they will:

- develop spoken language
- know how to make tools
- know how to grow crops and farm wild animals
- know how to ride wild animals
- develop written language and invent the paper to write it down
- know how to build boats

:rolleyes:

These things appeared at different times in history. They didn't just pop up 6000 years ago. I'm sure if you did some research you will realize this.

eg.
We have found tools around 2.6 million years old.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oldowan

We have found evidence of farming in 20000BC
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_agriculture
 
SaiyanZ im afraid your quest is futile , you should rather just make use of the ignore button. Its the only thing that can save your sanity.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top
Sign up to the MyBroadband newsletter
X