Ten Reason Why Evolution Is a Lie
Danfromsmithvill w

Savage, MN

#1849 Mar 28, 2014
ChristineM wrote:
<quoted text>
I am so glad you said average, because surely you reduce that average knowledge quotient by several percentage points
Have you ever examined a cell under a microscope? Chances are not, you have neither the will or the requirement. You are stuck with your bronze age jew magic and do not have the intellect to learn past that point.
The prevailing scientific knowledge of the time understood the cell as a “homogeneous globule of protoplasm”. The only references that I can find to Darwins “blobs” are from Casey Luskin, that prominent member of the much discredited and academically mocked discovery institute and Nancy Pearcey, that fine and upstanding evangelist godbot, IDer, limiter of children’s education and yet another member of the discovery institute
It seems their source of the deliberately disparaging and misleading term “blob” was a misrepresentation of a speech given by that other fine discovery institute liar (oops, member) Michael Behe who once commented “To Darwin, then, as to every other scientist of the time, the cell was a black box.”
150 years of research can work wonders for scientific advancement, Just consider that Einstein came up with the equation E=MC^2 in 1905 and only 40 years later the first atomic bomb was tested. The sub atomic electrical characteristics of germanium were first researched in the late 1940s, the first commercial fully transistorised computer was on sale 10 years later. And now evolution is not just an idea based on observation, a theory but is repeatedly proven beyond doubt by many independent and unrelated sources.
Redirect to what, a bronze age myth of god dun it with magic? Sorry buddy, I grew out of fairy stories when I became a teenager, I’ll stick with my knowledge and understanding of the modern world, but you are welcome to your gullibility, faith healing and donating your hard earned dollars to scam evangelists if that how you get you kicks.
But do 6 the graders have a better understanding do said blob? I believe they do.
Mitch

Savage, MN

#1850 Mar 28, 2014
The main scientific reason why there is no evidence for evolution in either the present or the past (except in the creative imagination of evolutionary scientists) is because one of the most fundamental laws of nature precludes it. The law of increasing entropy -- also known as the second law of thermodynamics -- stipulates that all systems in the real world tend to go "downhill," as it were, toward disorganization and decreased complexity.

This would of course exclude Mike and Kong.

“Nihil curo de ista tua stulta ”

Since: May 08

Orlando

#1851 Mar 28, 2014
Danfromsmithvillw wrote:
<quoted text>
But he called a cell a blob, 6 graders are smarter than him and you puppet...
Uh-huh.

And I'm sure you have a link for Darwin speaking or writing this quote?

“Nihil curo de ista tua stulta ”

Since: May 08

Orlando

#1852 Mar 28, 2014
Mitch wrote:
The main scientific reason why there is no evidence for evolution in either the present or the past (except in the creative imagination of evolutionary scientists) is because one of the most fundamental laws of nature precludes it. The law of increasing entropy -- also known as the second law of thermodynamics -- stipulates that all systems in the real world tend to go "downhill," as it were, toward disorganization and decreased complexity.
This would of course exclude Mike and Kong.
<GASP!!!> "NO! NOT THE DREADED 'SECOND LAW OF THERMODYNAMICS: "!!!

That you confidently bleat out the old worn out "2nd Law of Thermodynamics" to refute evolution says more about your lack of education than anything else.
The Dude

Wallasey, UK

#1853 Mar 28, 2014
Danfromsmithvillw wrote:
<quoted text>
He called cells blobs? Where is your evidence of evolution?
Your funny mike
Here you go:

http://www.topix.com/forum/news/evolution/T9Q...

Take your time refuting it.

No other creationist has ever done that on the entire planet in the past 3,000 years.
The Dude

Wallasey, UK

#1854 Mar 28, 2014
Danfromsmithvillw wrote:
<quoted text>
But he called a cell a blob, 6 graders are smarter than him and you puppet...
Something tells me that since he was an educated geologist who had a rather significant contribution to biology that he more than likely knew more than most 6th graders on the subject.

Sure, there are things that modern 6th graders know now more than he did, such as the internet for example. He was a product of his time. However suffice it to say, he knew more then than any creationist does today about biology. And he lived 150 years ago.

Now it's the 21st century and creationists are still going around claiming that the Flinstones is a science documentary. I'd say maybe one day they might catch up. But I doubt it, as they are looking back to the Dark Ages, and wanna look backwards. For them, fundamentalist theocracy trumps reality.

Just like them yoyo's in the Middle East who go around strapping bombs to their chests.
The Dude

Wallasey, UK

#1855 Mar 28, 2014
Mitch wrote:
The main scientific reason why there is no evidence for evolution in either the present or the past (except in the creative imagination of evolutionary scientists) is because one of the most fundamental laws of nature precludes it. The law of increasing entropy -- also known as the second law of thermodynamics -- stipulates that all systems in the real world tend to go "downhill," as it were, toward disorganization and decreased complexity.
This would of course exclude Mike and Kong.
So did when you started life as a single-celled organism did you increase in complexity or decrease in complexity as you developed into the (presumably) multi-cellular organism you are today?

If not, can you explain to me how a single-celled organism such as yourself is capable of using the internet?
The Dude

Wallasey, UK

#1856 Mar 28, 2014
Danfromsmithvillw wrote:
<quoted text>
But do 6 the graders have a better understanding do said blob? I believe they do.
By the way bub, the theory of evolution does not rely on abiogenesis.

“Pissing people off since 1949”

Level 8

Since: Apr 08

Lakeland, FL

#1857 Mar 30, 2014
Danfromsmithvillw wrote:
<quoted text>
He called cells blobs? Where is your evidence of evolution?
Your funny mike
And you're a goofball.

I win.

“Pissing people off since 1949”

Level 8

Since: Apr 08

Lakeland, FL

#1858 Mar 30, 2014
Danfromsmithvillw wrote:
<quoted text>
But he called a cell a blob, 6 graders are smarter than him and you puppet...
6th graders 150 years ago know very little about it.

Darwin wins.

“Pissing people off since 1949”

Level 8

Since: Apr 08

Lakeland, FL

#1859 Mar 30, 2014
Mitch wrote:
The main scientific reason why there is no evidence for evolution in either the present or the past (except in the creative imagination of evolutionary scientists) is because one of the most fundamental laws of nature precludes it. The law of increasing entropy -- also known as the second law of thermodynamics -- stipulates that all systems in the real world tend to go "downhill," as it were, toward disorganization and decreased complexity.
This would of course exclude Mike and Kong.
Thank you for demonstrating that you don't know squat about SLoT Moron.

Level 6

Since: Mar 12

Location hidden

#1860 Mar 31, 2014
Mitch wrote:
The main scientific reason why there is no evidence for evolution in either the present or the past (except in the creative imagination of evolutionary scientists) is because one of the most fundamental laws of nature precludes it. The law of increasing entropy -- also known as the second law of thermodynamics -- stipulates that all systems in the real world tend to go "downhill," as it were, toward disorganization and decreased complexity.
This would of course exclude Mike and Kong.
Wrong. The second law states that ISOLATED systems tend to go downhill. When energy can enter and leave the local system, you cannot make that prediction.

Your internal order increases from the time you are a single egg to the time you grow up because your body is taking in energy and expelling it. This should be impossible according to you. Think that life is an exception in this regard?

Even a simple hot coffee cooling on a bench is spontaneously REDUCING its internal entropy as it cools, emitting the heat energy into the environment.

Misunderstanding the second law is a creationist favourite.

Level 6

Since: Mar 12

Location hidden

#1861 Mar 31, 2014
Bob wrote:
Did you know that Darwin upon his death knew less than an average sixth grader does today?
The man that is the foundation of your arguments called a cell a blob.
You guys should redirect your faith
Darwin studies cells under a microscope and identified various organelles such as chloroplasts and even observed the internal motion of these cellular parts.

And by the way, in SCIENCE a man is not the foundation of any argument, even if that man first originated it. The foundation is physical evidence and logical coherence. Nobody accepts evolution because "Darwin said it", they accept it because it is overwhelmingly supported by evidence. Darwin spent 20 years accumulating evidence before he published and in the 150 years since, the evidence has increased massively through the findings of others.

“I started out with nothing”

Level 6

Since: Nov 10

and still got most of it left

#1862 Mar 31, 2014
Danfromsmithvillw wrote:
<quoted text>
But do 6 the graders have a better understanding do said blob? I believe they do.
Do you actually have any evidence that Darwin said “blob”?

Or are you just repeating what your discovery institute heroes claim because you are incapable of researching for yourself?

“I started out with nothing”

Level 6

Since: Nov 10

and still got most of it left

#1863 Mar 31, 2014
Mitch wrote:
The main scientific reason why there is no evidence for evolution in either the present or the past (except in the creative imagination of evolutionary scientists) is because one of the most fundamental laws of nature precludes it. The law of increasing entropy -- also known as the second law of thermodynamics -- stipulates that all systems in the real world tend to go "downhill," as it were, toward disorganization and decreased complexity.
This would of course exclude Mike and Kong.
There is considerable evidence that confirms evolution. Evidence from multiple, irrefutable and independently verified sources. So much evidence in fact that the theory of evolution is no longer the godbot idea of theory (guess) but the theory of evolution is proven as factual, in the same way as the theory of gravity is.

It seems that you don’t understand entropy on so may levels, but use it in blind ignorance because too many creatards have used it in blind ignorance in the past.

The 2nd law of thermodynamics applies to a closed system, one that does not have anything going in or out of it, as written in the law. This is a part of the law that godbots with more intelligence than yourself tend to conveniently forget (and you blindly follow). There is nothing in that law to prevent a part of that system importing from another part as demonstrated by the weather and evolution.

Weather is cyclic, warm weather following cold and cold following warm. The fact that cold weather has less entropy than warm weather seems to be beyond your understanding.

Evolution borrows from natural selection, another fact that seems to be beyond your comprehension
Bob

Savage, MN

#1864 Jun 18, 2014
Kong_ wrote:
<quoted text>
Uh-huh.
And I'm sure you have a link for Darwin speaking or writing this quote?
Do you miss Katie's hand up your wazoo Kong?
Bob

Savage, MN

#1865 Jun 18, 2014
The Dude wrote:
<quoted text>
So did when you started life as a single-celled organism did you increase in complexity or decrease in complexity as you developed into the (presumably) multi-cellular organism you are today?
If not, can you explain to me how a single-celled organism such as yourself is capable of using the internet?
So did when you edumakated yourself did you spend time in writing class?
Bob

Savage, MN

#1866 Jun 18, 2014
You guys are sad...

“Dinosaurs survived the flood!”

Level 9

Since: Jan 11

Jesus probably rode dinosaurs!

#1867 Jun 18, 2014
Bob wrote:
<quoted text>
Do you miss Katie's hand up your wazoo Kong?
Is this you Mitch? So you are looking for hands on work are you. You should check with Michelle Bachmann's husband, he might have something you to have a hand in.

“Dinosaurs survived the flood!”

Level 9

Since: Jan 11

Jesus probably rode dinosaurs!

#1868 Jun 18, 2014
Bob wrote:
You guys are sad...
Yet here you are bringing what was a dead thread back to life.

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 Bob of Quantum-Faith 16,165
can anyone explain to me why humans are the onl... (Mar '08) 27 min Bob of Quantum-Faith 216
News "Science vs. Religion: What Scientists Really T... (Jan '12) 55 min One way or another 40,680
News Evolution vs. Creation (Jul '11) 1 hr Regolith Based Li... 201,460
Scientists create vast 3-D map of universe, val... 4 hr One way or another 17
The conscious God or the inanimate nature 11 hr THE LONE WORKER 34
News Book aims to prove existence of God (Nov '09) 13 hr ChristineM 96
More from around the web