Why do people deny evolution?

@farmerman,

Yes, amazing. In this case it's calcified fossils from one of these calcifying springs.

But still, even though intra-cellular structures are preserved, the article only speaks of chromosomes being of the same number and size than in modern ferns. Of course they can't sequence the genes, so there's no telling if the content of their genome has changed or not. Probably hasn't changed much since the plants morphology hasn't changed either, but we can't really know.

0 Replies

@farmerman,

Qahog THINKS he has a clue. He's dead certain that the entirity of the scientific establishment is wrong and he THINKS he can prove it. Of course he is deluded but by definition, a hyper-skeptic (and qahog is a hyper-super-mega-skeptic) cannot accept evidence that comes from the establishment. Because the establishment can only lie, you see? Scientists and specialists (including you, who knows so much) are endoctrinated, according to the idea that education=endoctrination=in group thinking=religious obediance to dogma.

So the more you know, and the more you show him what you know in your trade, the LESS he will trust you. He concludes from your knowledge that you are clearly endoctrinated.

Hyper-skeptic debating rule 1: hyper-skeptics believe the specialists are suspect. Therefore, the MORE you show them evidence, the LESS they trust and believe you, and the more they suspect your motive or intelligence. Facts just don't help. That's one of the characteristics by which you can spot a hyper-skeptic.

3 Replies

@Olivier5,

That's really funny! They're completely brainwashed by one book written some 2000 years ago that includes so many errors and contradictions, but they want to question current science - that's really supported by evidence.

0 Replies

@Olivier5,

Quote:

Qahog THINKS he has a clue. He's dead certain that the entirity of the scientific establishment is wrong and he THINKS he can prove it. Of course he is deluded but by definition, a hyper-skeptic (and qahog is a hyper-super-mega-skeptic) cannot accept evidence that comes from the establishment. Because the establishment can only lie, you see? Scientists and specialists (including you, who knows so much) are endoctrinated, according to the idea that education=endoctrination=in group thinking=religious obediance to dogma.

So the more you know, and the more you show him what you know in your trade, the LESS he will trust you. He concludes from your knowledge that you are clearly endoctrinated.

Hyper-skeptic debating rule 1: hyper-skeptics believe the specialists are suspect. Therefore, the MORE you show them evidence, the LESS they trust and believe you, and the more they suspect your motive or intelligence. Facts just don't help. That's one of the characteristics by which you can spot a hyper-skeptic.

This one is funny!

of course if you show me real evidence I will accept it

Not some stupid authority you lean on!

difficult eh?

0 Replies

@Olivier5,

Quahog (and gunga in most respects), deny and deny , but have no idea of what they re denying. Weve caught Quahog in several points where hes pinted himself into a corner of illogical conclusions.(He is NOT a CREATIONIST, yet He exclusively presents silliness from Creationist "research"centers, and two of his sources are by people who accept evolution but with a separate mechanism.

One of my last "finals" I gave about 2 years ago involved presenting students with raw data from 2 different isotope samplings for 3 different deposit levels (all within several kilos of each other.Then they got several "settling tube" results for "soil ID" and then some nasty geophysical data from which they had to calculate the approximate locations (It was Laotolie).
Then they had (all open book) segment where they had to define the fossil assemblages of each layer and discuss the significance.

It was a single "methods" final and allowed the kids to work together but to author their own segments. Either the whole class flunks or "gets it"

\It was loaded with calculation upfront, then literature and raw "deep web" searching for "Big data".

Even though Quahog would argue, there certainly is No "indoctrination" (they either did the math or couldn't ).Also,I cant see where some kid would get hired by an oil company with a "bob Jones" style of education where kids really are indoctrinated to base all of their science training entirely on a literal Biblical interpretation of reality.

Back a few pages I asked Gunga (and Quahog if he was so inclined), to show me an accredited college who gives degrees in scince that deny evolution.
Some schools like Bob Jones Don't have a FULL biology curriculum so they can sidestep it ,(Besides they were never regionally accredited anyway)

1 Reply

@farmerman,

Quote:

Weve caught Quahog in several points where hes pinted himself into a corner of illogical conclusions.(He is NOT a CREATIONIST, yet He exclusively presents silliness from Creationist "research"centers, and two of his sources are by people who accept evolution but with a separate mechanism.

Yes, the hypers are unable to process, understand or even pay attention to evidence contradicting their view, BUT they can be put in a tough spot easily if you turn the table on them and ask for their own rival theory: eg how do they envision the history of earth and life? And then ask THEM for evidence of their claim, as successfully done by CI on the casino universe vs evolution thread.

Critique is easy; but art is difficult. As long as they remain in the position of critiquing YOUR theory and evidence (or just laugh at it, as they usually do), the hypers are in a strong, almost unassailable position. Nobody can be forced to believe any evidence or theory. You can bring a horse to water etc. But ask them for their own theory, their own evidence, and they must assume a much more exposed position. Which you can have fun at shooting down.

Of course that will not alter their position, but it makes for a less frustrating and less one-sided discussion.

1 Reply

@Olivier5,

lol

That is very vey very funny!

You do have evidence but we are not able to see it!!!!!

LOL, reminds me of the evolutionists!

Give it a try, mate!! show us the evidence for the Emperor's Clothes!!!

Good luck! You need it!!! Wink

1 Reply

why are the evolutionists so blind to the lack of evidence??!!!!

Hope, me thinks!!!

LOL

0 Replies

@Quehoniaomath,

This thread is full of such evidence.

Enlighten us Quehog. Tell us how earth was created, and when. Make us see the light.

2 Replies

@Olivier5,

Quote:

This thread is full of such evidence.

Enlighten us Quehog. Tell us how earth was created, and when. Make us see the light.

Enlighten?? You are talking bollocks again!

The ONLY thing I am asking is some evidence.

Saying there is a lot here won't do! That just means you are very very lazy!

But tell me this: Why do you believe in a stupid theory without any evidence?

1 Reply

@Olivier5,

Whats the difference between Quahog and a budgie?

1 Reply

@farmerman,

The main difference is that you can train a Budgie, but ...

0 Replies

@Quehoniaomath,

Quote:

The ONLY thing I am asking is some evidence.

Dito here. What is your theory, and what is your evidence for it?

Don't be shy...

1 Reply

@Olivier5,

Quote:

Dito here. What is your theory, and what is your evidence for it?

Don't be shy...

LOL. why must I have a theory??????

Gee, can't you read??????????????????????????????????????????????????????

I am asking for evidence, that is all. Why the **** are you asking me for a theory?????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????

You don't make much sense, mate!

You must be a very confused chap!!

Give it another go!!

1 Reply

we are quoting Darwin himself:

Quote:

"As, by this theory, innumerable transitional forms must have existed, why do we not find them embedded in the crust of the earth? Why is all nature not in confusion instead of being as we see them, well-defined species? Geological research does not yield the infinitely many fine gradations between past and present species required by the theory; and this is the most obvious of the many objections which may be argued against it."

Precisely.

1 Reply

@Quehoniaomath,

As explained many times before, fossils survive depending on its environment.
Brand that into your brain - if that's possible. Most living things after they die deteriorate; some trees even become stones over time. Survival of sequential fossils are not meant to provide 'you' with evidence for evolution. Enough fossils supported by DNA remain for scientists to arrive at theories about evolutionary transitions. It's for you to provide evidence that their theories are wrong by providing evidence to the contrary.

ANSWER THIS ONE QUESTION; PROVE YOUR GOD EXISTS.

2 Replies

@cicerone imposter,

Quote:

As explained many times before, fossils survive depending on its environment.
Brand that into your brain - if that's possible. Most living things after they die deteriorate; some trees even become stones over time. Survival of sequential fossils are not meant to provide 'you' with evidence for evolution. Enough fossils supported by DNA remain for scientists to arrive at theories about evolutionary transitions. It's for you to provide evidence that their theories are wrong by providing evidence to the contrary.

ANSWER THIS ONE QUESTION; PROVE YOUR GOD EXISTS.

Oh no!!! NOT AGAIN!!!

I have stated numerous times I am no creationist and don't believe in a God!!!!

I am only very skeptical of the evolution shite cause there is no evidence at all!!!

Are you so unimaginative that you can't think that if someone rejects the evolution shite, he or she must do so because of a believe in a God?????

Surely, get real, mate!!!!

The ONLY reason I don't take evolution seriously is because there is
1 no evidence.
2 statistical impossible
3 a hoax from the start by the 'Lunar Society"

where is god in this, mate????????????????????

0 Replies

@Quehoniaomath,

You have no alternative theory? No idea how all these species came to exist? What's the use of all this 'reading' of yours then?

1 Reply

@Olivier5,

Quote:

You have no alternative theory? No idea how all these species came to exist? What's the use of all this 'reading' of yours then?

Gee, don't you read this thread?????

This an old one!!

Having no alternative theory doesn't make evolution true, mate!!!!

Only evidence , of which there is none, does!!

2 Replies

@Quehoniaomath,

Ok so you have no clue how all these species came into being. Thanks for clarifying that.

And what makes you think evolution is NOT part of the explanation?

1 Reply

Why do people deny evolution?

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know