Recent Posts
Should evolution be taught in high school?
I quoted exactly what the author wrote. It is self explanatory and plain English. (4 hrs ago | post #131089)
Should evolution be taught in high school?
Yes, SuckZone. And it was my idea and my article that I found and that I referenced AND linked before you whined about not being able to find even though any moron could have Googled it. (4 hrs ago | post #131088)
Should evolution be taught in high school?
You didn't "find it". I find it. And I quoted from it. And I referenced it. And then Mike asked me for the link and I provided it. That was WAY before you whined even though you had enough info to find it. Evotards. (4 hrs ago | post #131083)
Should evolution be taught in high school?
Wrong about what? (4 hrs ago | post #131081)
Should evolution be taught in high school?
Not so much compared to you. Having the flu doesn't help. (4 hrs ago | post #131079)
Should evolution be taught in high school?
Now SuckZone, (See above) was that before or after you asked for it? (Even though it appeared several times and I again gave the brief (Crow, 1997)? (4 hrs ago | post #131075)
Should evolution be taught in high school?
May 19, 2013 Page 6369: MikeF wrote: I'm supposed to search the whole friggin internet for this. How about a publication title, pal. Urban Cowboy: Gee wiz man, we looked at it so many times and it is a famous article. I searched in Google "Crow 1997 mutation rates" and got it immediately. Poor baby. Crow, J.F. 1997. The high spontaneous mutation rate: Is it a health r isk? http://www.pnas.or g/content/94/16/83 80.full (4 hrs ago | post #131074)
Should evolution be taught in high school?
I didn't lie numbnuts. I provided this: (Crow, 1997) which is apparantly not enough for evotards like you or Mike but more than enough for most normal people. A simple Google search would bring it right up. I wasn't hiding anything. I gave the author's name, title and the year and discussed the article. You morons try this tactic every time I reference an article. I gave a full reference but even that was not good enough. Mike complained so I gave him the link. That was WAY before you asked for it. So you are nothing but a dirty no good low life lying piece of scum. (5 hrs ago | post #131072)
Should evolution be taught in high school?
No, you were caught lying again. Don't you remember, I don't have any reason to lie like you do. ANd even though I provided the complete reference, including the name of the author and the year he wrote it and then later gave Mike the link and the full reference and even though it was easily found in several comments and replies you lied that I didn't post it? Everybody knows you and your voodoo Darwin zombee evotard mates lie all the time because that's the core basis for evolutionary theory. Lying, childish name calling, and making-up just-so stories is really all you have going. You really are pathetic. Satanic really. Completely degenerate and corrupt to your core. (11 hrs ago | post #131043)
Should evolution be taught in high school?
When has any animal evolved and produced new species other than in the minds of evolutionists? (11 hrs ago | post #131042)
Should evolution be taught in high school?
Absolutely absurd. "Another poke in the eye"? LOL! (11 hrs ago | post #131041)
Should evolution be taught in high school?
You are such a lying skum bag. (17 hrs ago | post #131026)
Should evolution be taught in high school?
Man, Dogen. You've been saying the same thing for years now. Doesn't it ever get old? Maybe you're really just an evotarded pull-string talking puppet? But who's pulling the string? Hmm? (20 hrs ago | post #131001)
Should evolution be taught in high school?
I suppose a creationist has to reprint the entire article to avoid "quote mining". I obviously quoted text relevant to my point just like you did. And I did provide the complete reference and a link to that Crow paper much earlier and several times actually it was along with some other replies containing it. And then you post some stuff you think will rescue your cause (it didn't) and don't provide a link. So its OK when you do it but when I quote research it's called quote-mining. Hypocrite! And. Your attempt at sarcastic, self-deprecating British humor is BORING. The bottom line is there are dangerous mutations accumulating and none of them will ever add advancing information to the genome. That's what every article of this type is saying. Go ahead. Try and find one that refutes it. The genome is deteriorating. Genetic entropy. (20 hrs ago | post #131000)
Should evolution be taught in high school?
You answering all your own questions the way you want them answered. Yes, much of evolution is just like that. But what you present is just silly. Think of what you're asking me to swallow: We have millions of different species alive today, and they all have a small single cell universal common ancestor from 3 billion years ago. So from the minimum DNA length of this last common ancestor through all the branches of all the species over billions of years the unimaginable trillions of mutations that must have been required to get us to where we are today. And all you've got for your poster child of new DNA function is this paltry, measly, iffy little ERV crap? You gotta be kidding me Dude! LOL! Why not pull out the ole' citrate digesting bacteria trick, or maybe go with the malaria resistant sickle cell anemia mutation? Give me a friggin' break! Your case is beyond hopeless. (21 hrs ago | post #130995)
Q & A with Urban Cowboy
Headline:
Macroevolution Never Happened
Copyright ©2013 Topix LLC
