Evolution Refuted

Level 7

Since: Sep 07

Valley Village, CA

#87 Aug 15, 2013
imagine2011 wrote:
<quoted text> I'm not arguing with you, I'm just stating a fact. Just because you can't understand it, doesn't make it false, sorry "Nuggin".
Actually, you aren't stating a fact. You're stating a belief which you believe is a fact.

However, your belief is not founded on any real evidence nor any valid thinking.

Basically, you're afraid so you're clinging to a stuffed animal to help you through the night. In this case, your stuffed animal is religion.
Primeval Predator

Deception Bay, Australia

#88 Aug 15, 2013
Evoulotion is pooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo oooo
Primeval Predator

Deception Bay, Australia

#89 Aug 15, 2013
Hmmmmm this forum is the most active ever

“No such thing as ABIODARWINISM”

Level 9

Since: Jan 11

No ABIODARWINISTS either!

#90 Aug 15, 2013
imagine2011 wrote:
<quoted text>
The difference here is Darwin is dead and God the creator is alive.
So lying for God is OK. Gotcha.

“No such thing as ABIODARWINISM”

Level 9

Since: Jan 11

No ABIODARWINISTS either!

#91 Aug 15, 2013
imagine2011 wrote:
<quoted text>
The difference here is Darwin is dead and God the creator is alive.
If Darwin were alive, then it would be OK or bad. Just make something up.
imagine2011

Southaven, MS

#92 Aug 16, 2013
DanFromSmithville wrote:
<quoted text>If Darwin were alive, then it would be OK or bad. Just make something up.
If Darwin were alive, he' man up to his big mistake. He seemed to try to do that, in many of his statements that didn't add up, but there were so many people wanting to prove the Bible wrong, they took it and ran with it. They ran straight into a dead-end. That's why there is still the debate about what evo teaches. If it were all true, there wouldn't be any argument after almost 200 yrs, "doncha think"? Science seems to get many other things right within a decade or less, but evo, still not right after 200 years. It just doesn't add up or make sense.

Level 9

Since: Sep 08

Everett, WA

#93 Aug 16, 2013
imagine2011 wrote:
<quoted text>
If Darwin were alive, he' man up to his big mistake. He seemed to try to do that, in many of his statements that didn't add up, but there were so many people wanting to prove the Bible wrong, they took it and ran with it. They ran straight into a dead-end. That's why there is still the debate about what evo teaches. If it were all true, there wouldn't be any argument after almost 200 yrs, "doncha think"? Science seems to get many other things right within a decade or less, but evo, still not right after 200 years. It just doesn't add up or make sense.
You could not be more wrong.

He took the arguments that people would try to use against his theory and showed how they were not true. Creatards love to quote mine the parts where he takes on the role of the antis.

Why do you think that evolution is not right? All of the scientific evidence supports it. There are no other theories. In fact I have not seen another scientific hypothesis, well let me clear that up a little bit, I have not seen another scientific hypothesis that has not been totally debunked.

So what do you have? You seem to think that there is something scientifically wrong with the theory. Please be specific.

Level 9

Since: Sep 08

Everett, WA

#94 Aug 16, 2013
and yes, there is some disagreement about how evolution happened. There is no disagreement about if it happened.

Do you see that that there is a big difference between the two?

Level 6

Since: Mar 12

Location hidden

#95 Aug 16, 2013
imagine2011 wrote:
<quoted text>
If Darwin were alive, he' man up to his big mistake. He seemed to try to do that, in many of his statements that didn't add up, but there were so many people wanting to prove the Bible wrong, they took it and ran with it. They ran straight into a dead-end. That's why there is still the debate about what evo teaches. If it were all true, there wouldn't be any argument after almost 200 yrs, "doncha think"? Science seems to get many other things right within a decade or less, but evo, still not right after 200 years. It just doesn't add up or make sense.
If Darwin were alive, he would be delighted by the immense progress that science has made, and that his theory has been vindicated so thoroughly. He might be astounded that after so much evidence, there were still people who clinged to views already discredited by biology, astronomy, and geology even in 1860, but I suppose he might be philosophical about that.

Probably, that some people are so weak minded that even in the face of overwhelming evidence, they will believe anything to deny the reality of their own certain death.

Level 6

Since: Mar 12

Location hidden

#96 Aug 16, 2013
Subduction Zone wrote:
<quoted text>
You could not be more wrong.
He took the arguments that people would try to use against his theory and showed how they were not true. Creatards love to quote mine the parts where he takes on the role of the antis.
Why do you think that evolution is not right? All of the scientific evidence supports it. There are no other theories. In fact I have not seen another scientific hypothesis, well let me clear that up a little bit, I have not seen another scientific hypothesis that has not been totally debunked.
So what do you have? You seem to think that there is something scientifically wrong with the theory. Please be specific.
Imagine has named himself aptly.
The Dude

Birkenhead, UK

#97 Aug 16, 2013
imagine2011 wrote:
<quoted text>
If Darwin were alive, he' man up to his big mistake. He seemed to try to do that, in many of his statements that didn't add up, but there were so many people wanting to prove the Bible wrong, they took it and ran with it. They ran straight into a dead-end. That's why there is still the debate about what evo teaches. If it were all true, there wouldn't be any argument after almost 200 yrs, "doncha think"? Science seems to get many other things right within a decade or less, but evo, still not right after 200 years. It just doesn't add up or make sense.
Your lack of education doth not a valid argument make.

I see you still haven't apologized for lying. Hell it is for you then.
Rohan

Edinburgh, UK

#98 Aug 17, 2013
Kong_ wrote:
<quoted text>
Oh, you REALLY will not like THIS answer!
Actually I expected this type of answer you however are unlikely to like my answer.

On the one hand evolution presents a continuous theory of something out of (nearly) nothing and on the other at certain points postulates that there must have been a discrete jump. Seeing beyond the theoretical "how" (the chromosome fusion explanation) what you have basically said is that a 23 chromosome man was born of a 24 chromosome ape - Suppose I were to give you an almost childlike objection that well we don't see any apes give birth to humans today so evolution must be false.(or more subtly humans giving birth to apes- think about it!) You would say something like - "evolution takes place over millions/billions of years it is so gradual you can't even notice it" Yet you have basically said that once upon a time a 24 chromosome ape gave birth to a 23 chromosome man in a single generation.

Is it a discrete process or is it continuous? Both are impossible maybe for different reasons. The counter thesis is that God created everything directly in specific species. Judaism, Islam, Christianity and even Hinduism etc (Manu=Adam) holds this... are the adherents of almost all religions wrong? Is human logic wrong?

That a "Cretard" like me can answer this detailed scientific answer surely shows the paucity of your position so please go back to my original refutation and simply accept that God did it. That is why we call God the almighty after all. God can do anything.

“Nihil curo de ista tua stulta ”

Since: May 08

Orlando

#99 Aug 17, 2013
Rohan wrote:
<quoted text>
Actually I expected this type of answer you however are unlikely to like my answer.
Hit me with it...
Rohan wrote:
<quoted text>On the one hand evolution presents a continuous theory of something out of (nearly) nothing and on the other at certain points postulates that there must have been a discrete jump. Seeing beyond the theoretical "how" (the chromosome fusion explanation) what you have basically said is that a 23 chromosome man was born of a 24 chromosome ape - Suppose I were to give you an almost childlike objection that well we don't see any apes give birth to humans today so evolution must be false.(or more subtly humans giving birth to apes- think about it!) You would say something like - "evolution takes place over millions/billions of years it is so gradual you can't even notice it" Yet you have basically said that once upon a time a 24 chromosome ape gave birth to a 23 chromosome man in a single generation.
Since the ancestors of humans (and present-day humans)*ARE* "apes", the expression of the fusion that resulted in our fused chromosome 2 did not express itself in a dramatic, physical way. It was the ancestor to ALL of the present-day apes where, a VERY LONG TIME AGO, this chromosome fusion occurred.

The 'branch' of the tree where this fusion happened proceeded to produce Neanderthal, Denisovan, and us. The branches of the tree that kept the chromosomes seperated include the species of ape that include today's gorillas, bonobos, and chimpanzees.

http://biologos.org/blog/denisovans-humans-an...
Rohan wrote:
<quoted text>Is it a discrete process or is it continuous? Both are impossible maybe for different reasons. The counter thesis is that God created everything directly in specific species. Judaism, Islam, Christianity and even Hinduism etc (Manu=Adam) holds this... are the adherents of almost all religions wrong? Is human logic wrong?
The evidence suggests this appears to have happened once and to have been passed down a family line, eventually becoming a fixture in that species. How would this be "impossible"?

Perhaps God DID create all life in specific species. But the evidence He left us shows He began with the used evolution to do His bidding. Or do you feel that God molded "Adam" out of clay/dust, and "Eve" from the rib of Adam?
Rohan wrote:
<quoted text>That a "Cretard" like me can answer this detailed scientific answer surely shows the paucity of your position so please go back to my original refutation and simply accept that God did it. That is why we call God the almighty after all. God can do anything.
But apparently He cannot use evolution as part of His toolkit, right?
Rohan

Edinburgh, UK

#100 Aug 17, 2013
Subduction Zone wrote:
and yes, there is some disagreement about how evolution happened. There is no disagreement about if it happened.
Do you see that that there is a big difference between the two?
Yes, surely .... But is it not the reverse of what you claim, the mere fact that this debate forum exists refutes the second part of your statement and as to the first you (evolutionists) are broadly in agreement as to the theory. Therefore it seems to be the reverse of what you say.

“No such thing as ABIODARWINISM”

Level 9

Since: Jan 11

No ABIODARWINISTS either!

#101 Aug 17, 2013
imagine2011 wrote:
<quoted text>
If Darwin were alive, he' man up to his big mistake. He seemed to try to do that, in many of his statements that didn't add up, but there were so many people wanting to prove the Bible wrong, they took it and ran with it. They ran straight into a dead-end. That's why there is still the debate about what evo teaches. If it were all true, there wouldn't be any argument after almost 200 yrs, "doncha think"? Science seems to get many other things right within a decade or less, but evo, still not right after 200 years. It just doesn't add up or make sense.
You are not very good at reading comprehension. All Darwin did was mention the places where the theory lacked strong evidence at the time he wrote Origin of Species. Some time has passed since then if you were not aware. We have found a lot of evidence in the intervening years and it all supports the theory.

Anything can be said in a "what if" statement, but as that may, I think he would be overwhelmed at how much he got right, how much evidence continues to be found in support of TOE and how much more has been opened to examination because of TOE. Having read much about him, I can't imagine he would be anything if not pleased.

Most of the early scientists and many from Darwin's time were not interested in showing the Bible to be wrong. Many, maybe most were trying to fit the facts with the Bible. Of these, a fair number were clergy themselves. They just kept running into facts that didn't support Genesis. You apparently live by and are supporting the idea that we should just ignore those pesky little facts and approach belief in God with a head full of lies and denial.

You don't propose a very sound or intelligent basis for spiritual enlightenment.

There is debate because a small group of very fundamentalists Christians decided 200 years ago, that the Bible has to be word for word true and believed as such. Get it through you head. Evolution doesn't refute God or even attempt to. It fits nicely with the traditional view of the Bible as allegory. Just because you don't understand science and are stuck in a rigid dead end view of Christianity is your problem. You have no right to force that problem on the rest of the world.

“No such thing as ABIODARWINISM”

Level 9

Since: Jan 11

No ABIODARWINISTS either!

#102 Aug 17, 2013
imagine2011 wrote:
<quoted text>
If Darwin were alive, he' man up to his big mistake. He seemed to try to do that, in many of his statements that didn't add up, but there were so many people wanting to prove the Bible wrong, they took it and ran with it. They ran straight into a dead-end. That's why there is still the debate about what evo teaches. If it were all true, there wouldn't be any argument after almost 200 yrs, "doncha think"? Science seems to get many other things right within a decade or less, but evo, still not right after 200 years. It just doesn't add up or make sense.
Science has found a lot of answers because of the theory you are against. You don't have the ability to make that connection or you don't want to.

Have you seen my gravitons? I know I left them here somewhere.

“No such thing as ABIODARWINISM”

Level 9

Since: Jan 11

No ABIODARWINISTS either!

#103 Aug 17, 2013
Rohan wrote:
<quoted text>
Actually I expected this type of answer you however are unlikely to like my answer.
On the one hand evolution presents a continuous theory of something out of (nearly) nothing and on the other at certain points postulates that there must have been a discrete jump. Seeing beyond the theoretical "how" (the chromosome fusion explanation) what you have basically said is that a 23 chromosome man was born of a 24 chromosome ape - Suppose I were to give you an almost childlike objection that well we don't see any apes give birth to humans today so evolution must be false.(or more subtly humans giving birth to apes- think about it!) You would say something like - "evolution takes place over millions/billions of years it is so gradual you can't even notice it" Yet you have basically said that once upon a time a 24 chromosome ape gave birth to a 23 chromosome man in a single generation.
Is it a discrete process or is it continuous? Both are impossible maybe for different reasons. The counter thesis is that God created everything directly in specific species. Judaism, Islam, Christianity and even Hinduism etc (Manu=Adam) holds this... are the adherents of almost all religions wrong? Is human logic wrong?
That a "Cretard" like me can answer this detailed scientific answer surely shows the paucity of your position so please go back to my original refutation and simply accept that God did it. That is why we call God the almighty after all. God can do anything.
You aren't answering anything with logic or detailed scientific analysis. You jump right on the notoriously abused notion that apes give birth to humans. No scientist has ever made that claim. The chromosome fusion would have occurred in our ancestry and become established in the population that eventually lead to us.

The religions you mention are all old and established when mankind's knowledge of the world was rather limited. It doesn't surprise me that they have such similarities. It isn't like these cultures were buried in isolation of each other. Christianity sprang from Judaism and Islam sprang from both. It is would be unusual that those three didn't have a similar basis.

The paucity of information seems to be on your side. You seem to want to declare victory without bothering to offer much of an argument. Just accept your view and move on. Very detailed.

“No such thing as ABIODARWINISM”

Level 9

Since: Jan 11

No ABIODARWINISTS either!

#104 Aug 17, 2013
Rohan wrote:
<quoted text>
Yes, surely .... But is it not the reverse of what you claim, the mere fact that this debate forum exists refutes the second part of your statement and as to the first you (evolutionists) are broadly in agreement as to the theory. Therefore it seems to be the reverse of what you say.
He said that debate over how evolution takes place is real. So you can have a debate forum based just on that. The debate about whether it happened is largely that of fundamentalist religionists that place their faith in dogma than in God. There is no debate on "if" in science.

Your interpretation of what he is saying is wrong.

Level 6

Since: Mar 12

Location hidden

#105 Aug 19, 2013
Rohan wrote:
<quoted text>
Actually I expected this type of answer you however are unlikely to like my answer.
On the one hand evolution presents a continuous theory of something out of (nearly) nothing and on the other at certain points postulates that there must have been a discrete jump. Seeing beyond the theoretical "how" (the chromosome fusion explanation) what you have basically said is that a 23 chromosome man was born of a 24 chromosome ape - Suppose I were to give you an almost childlike objection that well we don't see any apes give birth to humans today so evolution must be false.(or more subtly humans giving birth to apes- think about it!) You would say something like - "evolution takes place over millions/billions of years it is so gradual you can't even notice it" Yet you have basically said that once upon a time a 24 chromosome ape gave birth to a 23 chromosome man in a single generation.
Is it a discrete process or is it continuous? Both are impossible maybe for different reasons. The counter thesis is that God created everything directly in specific species. Judaism, Islam, Christianity and even Hinduism etc (Manu=Adam) holds this... are the adherents of almost all religions wrong? Is human logic wrong?
That a "Cretard" like me can answer this detailed scientific answer surely shows the paucity of your position so please go back to my original refutation and simply accept that God did it. That is why we call God the almighty after all. God can do anything.
The fusion of a chromosome is not a "new species event", as the underlying genetic code residing in the genes is unaffected.

There are species today with variable numbers of chromosomes in the same population. At some point, therefore, we would posit that a gene fusion event occurred and that for a long period there was a population of hominids with a similarly mixed number. Eventually, and probably through drift rather than selection, one number came to predominate.

http://scienceblogs.com/pharyngula/2008/04/21...

and here you can see an article showing those cases of multiple chromosome numbers in the same species...

http://www.indiana.edu/~ensiweb/chrom.surviv....

The Dude

Birkenhead, UK

#106 Aug 19, 2013
Rohan wrote:
Actually I expected this type of answer you however are unlikely to like my answer.
On the one hand evolution presents a continuous theory of something out of (nearly) nothing
Blatantly false. You can't critique a theory you don't know the first thing about.
Rohan wrote:
and on the other at certain points postulates that there must have been a discrete jump. Seeing beyond the theoretical "how" (the chromosome fusion explanation) what you have basically said is that a 23 chromosome man was born of a 24 chromosome ape - Suppose I were to give you an almost childlike objection that well we don't see any apes give birth to humans today so evolution must be false.(or more subtly humans giving birth to apes- think about it!)
Since humans are apes we do see evolution giving birth to apes every day, therefore evolution remains unaffected. You appear to be under the misunderstanding that evolution expects a new species to be born instantly. That is not the case.
Rohan wrote:
You would say something like - "evolution takes place over millions/billions of years it is so gradual you can't even notice it" Yet you have basically said that once upon a time a 24 chromosome ape gave birth to a 23 chromosome man in a single generation.
Which, as long as it doesn't affect reproduction, would not prevent evolution. Nor does it mean the new offspring is a new species.
Rohan wrote:
Is it a discrete process or is it continuous? Both are impossible maybe for different reasons.
According to your own position literally NOTHING is impossible.
Rohan wrote:
The counter thesis is that God created everything directly in specific species. Judaism, Islam, Christianity and even Hinduism etc (Manu=Adam) holds this... are the adherents of almost all religions wrong?
There are some people of these religions who accept evolution. However religious literalists who take the childish fairy tale of Adam and Eve literally are plain wrong.
Rohan wrote:
Is human logic wrong?
You are mistaken if you think "logic" is a single internally consistent concept. There are many models of "logic", all dependant upon certain axioms. Saying the Bible is true cuz the Bible sez so is "logical", based on the axiom of Divine Authority. However there's no rational reason to support the original axiom in the first place.
Rohan wrote:
That a "Cretard" like me can answer this detailed scientific answer surely shows the paucity of your position so please go back to my original refutation and simply accept that God did it.
You haven't answered anything. All you have done is demonstrate your total ignorance of the scientific method and make a baseless claim that Goddidit. This is a WHO, not a HOW. And it's a claim with zero scientific evidence. Not to mention the fact that you keep moving onto different objections you have to evolution without actually addressing anything we say.
Rohan wrote:
That is why we call God the almighty after all. God can do anything.
Except evolution. Apparently. "Impossible" you claimed. In which case I would like to know have you were able to determine God's limits via the scientific method. Just one problem - you can't even scientifically demonstrate that this God of yours even exists yet.

That is why science doesn't care about your claims. We can demonstrate evolution using evidence. Problem is you didn't understand it when some was presented. Either way, IF a God exists, God used evolution. Or God is a liar.

Anything is possible.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Evolution Debate Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News Atheism, for Good Reason, Fears Questions (Jun '09) 3 min Eagle 12 6,273
News Evolution vs. Creation (Jul '11) 3 min ChristineM 187,655
News Should evolution be taught in high school? (Feb '08) 4 min One way or another 179,508
News It's the Darwin crowd that lacks the facts in e... (Mar '09) 1 hr Critical Eye 148,479
News "Science vs. Religion: What Scientists Really T... (Jan '12) 3 hr Chimney1 27,468
Will Gravitational Waves Reveal the Origin of t... 20 hr Critical Eye 10
News This year's first batch of anti-science educati... Fri Critical Eye 7
More from around the web