Ten Reason Why Evolution Is a Lie

Level 6

Since: Mar 12

Location hidden

#1727 Aug 24, 2013
replaytime wrote:
<quoted text>
Again you miss the point. If a Arkansas hillbilly goes to a science debate and speaks, he is just speaking for he does not know science and for that he can not in reality be in a scientific debate. To be in a true debate both parties have to be well educated/versed in what they are debating on, if one is and the other isn't, then it really can not be deemed a debate. Then it would be just a conversation.
Then it would be explained to him why "kinds" falls down when we look more closely at reality and is inadequate, and why the idea of separate creation of kinds falls to pieces on close inspection.

“There is no Truth in Faith”

Level 5

Since: Dec 08

nowhere near a pound of $100's

#1728 Aug 24, 2013
Mitch wrote:
<quoted text>
How do you observe evolution subduction?
With seizmometers and subterrainian sonar/radar ... next!?!

“There is no Truth in Faith”

Level 5

Since: Dec 08

nowhere near a pound of $100's

#1729 Aug 24, 2013
Mitch wrote:
<quoted text>
A bird is a bird right? A change in kind indicates a change from a turtle to a toad right?
Wings that swim versus wings that fly, wings that do both are adaptations right? Like a man who lost his right hand adapts to using his left, he looses both hands, he adapts to using his feet.
Adaptations are not changes of kind. A bird is a bird.
So, an eagle is a swan. I bet you don't see how stupid that is, do ya monkey boy?

“There is no Truth in Faith”

Level 5

Since: Dec 08

nowhere near a pound of $100's

#1730 Aug 24, 2013
Mitch wrote:
<quoted text>
But you not thinking for you or me...a ring species is not a change of kind
A lizzards descending from a lizzard is still a lizzard right? It may hav adapted, but it did not change it's kind.
BLIND FAITH
So then you have no problem with one ape turning into another kind of ape, like say a chimpanzee into a human.

But then you add up a bunch of these changes over a long period of time and you've got protozoa turning in to humans.

Sounds like you've got the evolution thing down pat.

“There is no Truth in Faith”

Level 5

Since: Dec 08

nowhere near a pound of $100's

#1731 Aug 24, 2013
Mitch wrote:
So you feel there is no intelligent design right?
The Big Bang got it going..nothing from nothing?
Make me a grain of sand, out of nothing.
Just one grain.
BLIND FAITH
Show me where anything ever needed to be made of nothing. I'll wait ....

Level 7

Since: Sep 07

Los Angeles, CA

#1732 Aug 24, 2013
replaytime wrote:
<quoted text>
Again you miss the point. If a Arkansas hillbilly goes to a science debate and speaks, he is just speaking for he does not know science and for that he can not in reality be in a scientific debate. To be in a true debate both parties have to be well educated/versed in what they are debating on, if one is and the other isn't, then it really can not be deemed a debate. Then it would be just a conversation.
Not what you said earlier.

What you are failing to understand is that some of the people on this side of the table are professional scientists. Others are just well educated.

None of the people on your side of the table have an education, experience in science or even a basic grasp on reality.

Jews don't have magic powers.

“Ask Randy From Ballwin”

Level 5

Since: Mar 13

He Is A Sock Know It All

#1733 Aug 24, 2013
Nuggin wrote:
<quoted text>
Not what you said earlier.
What you are failing to understand is that some of the people on this side of the table are professional scientists. Others are just well educated.
None of the people on your side of the table have an education, experience in science or even a basic grasp on reality.
Jews don't have magic powers.
And that is a biased opinion. What you are saying is that if you don't believe in evolution then you must be an un-educated stupid person.

So why is it that you believe that either a person believes in evolution or they are un-educated?

Level 9

Since: Sep 08

Everett, WA

#1734 Aug 24, 2013
replaytime wrote:
<quoted text>
And that is a biased opinion. What you are saying is that if you don't believe in evolution then you must be an un-educated stupid person.
So why is it that you believe that either a person believes in evolution or they are un-educated?
Wrong. It is obvious from the posts of the various creationists that they all are terribly ignorant when it comes to science.

Not only that, they have some sort of internal blockage that makes them unable to learn. They keep repeating the same mistakes, even if, rarity of rarities, they admit that they are wrong.

“Nihil curo de ista tua stulta ”

Since: May 08

Orlando

#1735 Aug 24, 2013
replaytime wrote:
<quoted text>
And that is a biased opinion. What you are saying is that if you don't believe in evolution then you must be an un-educated stupid person.
So why is it that you believe that either a person believes in evolution or they are un-educated?
Because of our experiences here.

And because this has been supported by study(ies).

"Because public support of science correlates positively to level of schooling and income (The Pew Research Center for the People and the Press 2005; National Science Foundation 2006), local and regional differential acceptance of evolution should be expected if similar assessments were conducted at public or other private secular/religious institutions. Note that acceptance of evolution in Northeastern USA (59%) is the highest nationwide (The Pew Research Center for the People and the Press 2005).

In fact, acceptance of the theory of evolution in the USA increases with level of education, from 20% in high school to 52% and 65% among college graduates or postgraduates, respectively (Brumfield 2005); our interinstitutional (64% of biology majors, mean RWU + PC, Fig. 1a, choice A; 66% of biology majors, mean RWU + PC, Fig. 6a, choices A + C) or intrainstitutional comparisons’ results (60% of RWU or 68% of PC biology majors, Fig. 7a, choice A; 66% of both RWU and PC biology majors, Fig. 12a, b, choices A + C) are comparable to or higher than the latter. Adults who, for example, believe that humans were designed in the present form within the last 10,000 years coincide with the views of the least educated population (13–17-year-old adolescents; Brumfield 2005)."

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3...

“Ask Randy From Ballwin”

Level 5

Since: Mar 13

He Is A Sock Know It All

#1736 Aug 24, 2013
Kong_ wrote:
<quoted text>
Because of our experiences here.
And because this has been supported by study(ies).
"Because public support of science correlates positively to level of schooling and income (The Pew Research Center for the People and the Press 2005; National Science Foundation 2006), local and regional differential acceptance of evolution should be expected if similar assessments were conducted at public or other private secular/religious institutions. Note that acceptance of evolution in Northeastern USA (59%) is the highest nationwide (The Pew Research Center for the People and the Press 2005).
In fact, acceptance of the theory of evolution in the USA increases with level of education, from 20% in high school to 52% and 65% among college graduates or postgraduates, respectively (Brumfield 2005); our interinstitutional (64% of biology majors, mean RWU + PC, Fig. 1a, choice A; 66% of biology majors, mean RWU + PC, Fig. 6a, choices A + C) or intrainstitutional comparisons’ results (60% of RWU or 68% of PC biology majors, Fig. 7a, choice A; 66% of both RWU and PC biology majors, Fig. 12a, b, choices A + C) are comparable to or higher than the latter. Adults who, for example, believe that humans were designed in the present form within the last 10,000 years coincide with the views of the least educated population (13–17-year-old adolescents; Brumfield 2005)."
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3...
Nice answer but as the title of the article says "Acceptance of Evolution Increases with Student Academic Level: A Comparison Between a Secular and a Religious College"

Now from what I saw when I read it that it is based on two schools(between a secular RWU (S) and a religious PC (R) college). Between RWU and PC 831 students took part in the study. Of the 831, 449 were biology majors and 382 were non-majors. All though the numbers where higher for evolution(from both sides), they seemed a bit mixed over all. I am not saying that since the biology majors had 67 more participants(roughly 15% more) in the study than the non-majors that it had any affect on the study. But over all a great article.

Level 7

Since: Sep 07

Los Angeles, CA

#1737 Aug 24, 2013
replaytime wrote:
<quoted text>
And that is a biased opinion. What you are saying is that if you don't believe in evolution then you must be an un-educated stupid person.
So why is it that you believe that either a person believes in evolution or they are un-educated?
I have two answers:

First, experience. We've met A LOT of people who deny science and hands down all of them have been uneducated.

Second, definition. Evolution is a part of a standard educations. If you don't understand evolution you are, by definition, uneducated.

Level 6

Since: Mar 12

Location hidden

#1738 Aug 25, 2013
replaytime wrote:
<quoted text>
And that is a biased opinion. What you are saying is that if you don't believe in evolution then you must be an un-educated stupid person.
So why is it that you believe that either a person believes in evolution or they are un-educated?
For starters, a scientifically literate person would not use the phrase "believe in" regarding a scientific theory.

We don't believe in quantum theory or relativity or evolution or the big bang.

We accept that these theories are the best explanation we have for observed phenomena and also make the best predictions concerning what we are likely to observe. We accept these on a confidence level based on the depth of evidence they have supporting them.

We will no longer accept them if and when either evidence falsifying them is discovered, or a new theory explaining the same phenomena better is developed.

Accepting means accepting that the theories are probably either true or close to true.

"Believing in" something is an act of faith, acceptance of evidence based theories is an act of reason. That is something that scientifically educated people understand.

“Is that all you've got?”

Since: Jun 10

Location hidden

#1739 Aug 25, 2013
Ooogah Boogah wrote:
<quoted text>
Show me where anything ever needed to be made of nothing. I'll wait ....
I thought you were an acolyte?



What a joker.

“Is that all you've got?”

Since: Jun 10

Location hidden

#1740 Aug 25, 2013
Nuggin wrote:
<quoted text>
Not what you said earlier.
What you are failing to understand is that some of the people on this side of the table are professional scientists. Others are just well educated.
None of the people on your side of the table have an education, experience in science or even a basic grasp on reality.
Jews don't have magic powers.
Using a broad brush makes for a very sloppy picture, nutjob.

Level 7

Since: Sep 07

Los Angeles, CA

#1741 Aug 25, 2013
nanoanomaly wrote:
<quoted text>Using a broad brush makes for a very sloppy picture, nutjob.
How fine a brush do you need before you can conclude that Jews are magical creatures?

“Is that all you've got?”

Since: Jun 10

Location hidden

#1742 Aug 25, 2013
Nuggin wrote:
<quoted text>
How fine a brush do you need before you can conclude that Jews are magical creatures?
You claim all believers are uneducated. Your brush failed you.

Level 7

Since: Sep 07

Los Angeles, CA

#1743 Aug 25, 2013
nanoanomaly wrote:
<quoted text>You claim all believers are uneducated. Your brush failed you.
If they believe in Creationism, they are uneducated by definition.

“Is that all you've got?”

Since: Jun 10

Location hidden

#1744 Aug 25, 2013
Nuggin wrote:
<quoted text>
If they believe in Creationism, they are uneducated by definition.
Prove the universe was not created by a conscious entity.

Level 7

Since: Sep 07

Los Angeles, CA

#1745 Aug 25, 2013
nanoanomaly wrote:
<quoted text>Prove the universe was not created by a conscious entity.
Prove that I can't prove that.

I can play "infinite negative proofs" with you all day long.

“There is no Truth in Faith”

Level 5

Since: Dec 08

nowhere near a pound of $100's

#1746 Aug 26, 2013
nanoanomaly wrote:
<quoted text>I thought you were an acolyte?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v =-EilZ4VY5VsXX
What a joker.
"... the universe could have potentially come from "nothing" is not the same as "necessarily came from nothing" ....

You don't read with comprehension very much, do you? Dimwit!

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 Evolution vs. Creation (Jul '11) 6 min River Tam 220,577
News It's the Darwin crowd that lacks the facts in e... (Mar '09) 4 hr River Tam 160,266
News "Science vs. Religion: What Scientists Really T... (Jan '12) 4 hr Aura Mytha 61,222
News Nonsense of a high order: The confused world of... 7 hr Subduction Zone 2,675
News Atheism, for Good Reason, Fears Questions (Jun '09) 12 hr Dogen 28,314
News Book aims to prove existence of God (Nov '09) Thu Regolith Based Li... 99
News Should evolution be taught in high school? (Feb '08) Mar 16 Dogen 180,394
More from around the web