Why do people deny evolution?

     Where is your listing with the enumeration of the Gaps ... of the Evolution, on this forum?

Unmoving nature uses its self as death to shape the moving life forms in the event.

Your esoteric effluents about evolution seem far from erudite.

Neo are you a vocabularist b any chance

That which does not move and has never happen is the cause of the time that moving happening things move in and death is its hidden arm for change.

In the other thread in this forum. Turn on your memory function and read the thread you started, wingnut. Where's your evidence that an alien/ILF/god-thingy is teleporting the structure of the universe over billions of years to the present?

     No, no, don't do be a ... what you actually are. Of course this thread is entirely about the Еvolution of Life on Earth, but the missing link here is that the scientism is claiming that the Еvolution of Life is the 'natural continuation' (whatever that is supposed to mean) of the Evolution of the Stars.
     You claim that I 'have constructed all my beliefs in God' exclusively on your straw-man top design conception about 'God-of-the-Gaps', which implicitly suggests that the Gaps are not only in the 'Evolution of the Stars', but also in the 'Evolution of Life on Earth', from where automatically follows that you are supposed to present and to enumerate, and to specify with precision up to the 18th digit after the decimal point, all that Gaps - all of them, without skipping anything.
     When ... and IF you ever succeed to enumerate the Gaps, we may have a base for further discussion.

If you ever provided any evidence instead of pseudo-intellectual psychobabble, red herrings and other fallacies, we'd have a shitload more to talk about.

... if you can call your broken record on idle mode a talk.

Maybe the self-appointed scientists should admit to some of the holes in it, and maybe the religious nutters should admit it is fairly solid science and the Bible couldnt possibly be the literal word of God . Unfortunately, the unintelligent on both sides need their doctrine .

I'm pretty sure all the science-literate people that I know of here are aware that the theory still has plenty of unanswered questions. But pointing to those unanswered questions as a way of promoting a contrary hypothesis is textbook god-of-the-gaps fallacy. To support one's hypothesis, one needs to present positive, testable evidence for that claim, not arguments about faults in other claims.

Ahhh, no...it is perfectly reasonable to expose faults in others claims . Isnt that what the self proclaimed scientists are doing ?

It is perfectly reasonable to expose faults in others' claims, but not pointing out gaps as a premise in your own argument for a place to wedge in your own claim, like a certain knobjockey in this thread has been trying to do. You seem pretty literate. You've heard of the g0d-of-the-gaps approach?

I agree with FBM on this.

Most scientists...and people on the scientific side of the debate...have no problem at all acknowledging the holes that exist.

None at all.

To equate that side with the side of the "religious nutters" makes almost no sense.

that is no argument, mate.

There are times I think you would not recognize and an "argument", Q, if one fell on you?

In any case, I was not making an argument...I was sharing an observation.

Sometimes it helps to get down to the nuts and bolts:

This is lso not a valid argument at all. Just a AH, mind you!



No, you were not! if you write down:



That is NOT an observation, but an attempt to an argument.

However, this argument is not valid. But you are dodging now.
A bit like a coward.


Nice try , mate

tryig to say..Errr..what????!

I just did .