Why do people deny evolution?

@Quehoniaomath,

you have no rightt to ask for anything fom us, considering yyou hav spent this entire thread denying rhe evidence presented and providing no evidennce as to why you considr the evidence invalid beyond your simple denial, which is tott ally not credible. Start with the 29+ evidences for macr evolution, which you've completely avoided before you dare ask.anything of us.

1 Reply

@MontereyJack,

Quote:

you have no rightt to ask for anything fom us, considering yyou hav spent this entire thread denying rhe evidence presented and providing no evidennce as to why you considr the evidence invalid beyond your simple denial, which is tott ally not credible. Start with the 29+ evidences for macr evolution, which you've completely avoided before you dare ask.anything of us.

wow

something I have written?

As I have written, you can't deliver the goodies!

I ask for a very simple definition of evolution and considering your reply, are not even able to handle this and then start a whole bunch of stupid rationalisations, why you won't answer

Of course you can't deliver and give the definition.

But eh?! don't do it for me but for all those people reading.

Come on, just define 'evolution'

why so scared?

1 Reply

@Quehoniaomath,

YAAWWWN!!!!!

You do get boring.

Where is your evidence?
You claim everything presented here is not real and is a hoax but you have no evidence other than your personal claim that it is such. Anything you don't want to believe is true you simply claim is not true. It seems you fit the definition of a knee jerk skeptic you presented in another thread.

0 Replies

@Quehoniaomath,

Stop trying to redirect, quahog. Get a dictionary. And stop trying to smouflage thjre fact that you are absoluely unable to answer ssny of the pointsd that have been prresented. So far the score stands. EVOLUTION 34-QUAHOG zero.

1 Reply

@Quehoniaomath,

Quahog, you stand revealed as a liar, a libeler, and a charlaatan. The cite provided 29+ evidences of macro evolution. You countered NONE of them, let alone 29. You made an inept response to a totally differrent list of proofs of evolutin with your half assed reference ro Ernst Haeckel which wass only peripherally relevant to one ofthose five points. Evolutionists have said for more rhan a century that haeckel's ontogeny reca
Piituates hlogeny was not generally crrect but creationists keep bringing it up. His statement thaat embryos at one stage hae great morphological similarity does continue to mpress research, as recent papers by Max Planck scientists show. So you score no points forr that attempted rebuttal either.

1 Reply

@MontereyJack,

The difference in statistical imformation creates patterns in the statistics that show a creator at work .

0 Replies

Isn't it interesting to see that nobody here is able to define evolution?

Now, doesn't that tell us something?

0 Replies

@MontereyJack,

Quote:

Stop trying to redirect, quahog. Get a dictionary. And stop trying to smouflage thjre fact that you are absoluely unable to answer ssny of the pointsd that have been prresented. So far the score stands. EVOLUTION 34-QUAHOG zero.

Does it look like a match to you?
You are very strange indeed.

Have you ever convinced a christian his religion his wrong?

It is the same here. People defend their religion and don't even see when they are in denial or avoiding things that are contrary to their religion, called evolution.

So, this numbers game is also wrong and extremely stupid.

Now, why do still cling to the religion called evolutiion?

0 Replies

Code:

why do you cling to denial as a religion when presented with ecidence rhat you can't even make a pretense of refuting?

1 Reply

Code:

why do you cling to denial as a religion when presented with ecidence rhat you can't even make a pretense of refuting? Come on quahog, 29 points plus other evidences and you haven't answered any ofthem. NONE of them. Scared?

0 Replies

@MontereyJack,

Quote:

why do you cling to denial as a religion when presented with ecidence rhat you can't even make a pretense of refuting?

you really, really think the presented 'evidence' was really evidence?

You do blindly belief. Just as I have written.

Don't you see evolution is one of the stupidest theories ever invented?
(well, relativity is the close next one.)

scared? lol for what? illusions can't scare anyone!

2 Replies

And still nobody has defined evolution!

Scared?

Of course they are, because they talk about things they haven't defined.

So, becuase it is not defined they can go in all directions to defend this rubbbish.

They need this, because honesty and real solid logic would ruin their theory.

So, I know no one is ging to define evolution,

It will ruin their game.

1 Reply

@Quehoniaomath,

Bluff and bluster,nthat's all youare, quahog. You mke it blindinglyobvious that you can't construct s logicl argumnt defending your denialism so you try to bluff nd blustr your way thru. It doesn't work. You're not credible.

1 Reply

@MontereyJack,

Quote:

Bluff and bluster,nthat's all youare, quahog. You mke it blindinglyobvious that you can't construct s logicl argumnt defending your denialism so you try to bluff nd blustr your way thru. It doesn't work. You're not credible.

wow, even I , who's language is not english , even far from it , can see how wrong your english is!

Maybe a bit emotional , mate?

Anyway, I repeat again:

And still nobody has defined evolution!

Scared?

Of course they are, because they talk about things they haven't defined.

So, becuase it is not defined they can go in all directions to defend this rubbbish.

They need this, because honesty and real solid logic would ruin their theory.

So, I know no one is ging to define evolution,

It will ruin their game.

But eh. you just proved my point. Again!

0 Replies

@Quehoniaomath,

Poor quahog, inxapable of finding the "e" words in a dictionary or wikipedia. We're not. W Hy is he?

1 Reply

@MontereyJack,

Quote:

Poor quahog, inxapable of finding the "e" words in a dictionary or wikipedia. We're not. W Hy is he?

I am asking you. why can't you deliver the goodies?

with this 'argument' of you, you can tell as an answer to anyone to just 'google' it.

Now, how is that for stupidty?

1 Reply

And still nobody has defined evolution!

Scared?

Of course they are, because they talk about things they haven't defined.

So, because it is not defined they can go in all directions to defend this rubbbish.

They need this, because honesty and real solid logic would ruin their theory.

So, I know no one is ging to define evolution,

It will ruin their game.

But eh. you just proved my point. Again!

0 Replies

@Quehoniaomath,

Right, quahog, deliver th goodie. You' ve been bobbing and weaving, anything to avoid actually having to answer the points and the evidence that evoluionists hve presented you. And you know damned well that when you do it again it's going to be obvious what a phony you are.

1 Reply

@MontereyJack,

only give me the definition of evolution now. Or can't you?

1 Reply

@Quehoniaomath,

Thnk you for proving my point, quahog, that you'll bob and weave to try to avoid proving you post. You just did it again.

1 Reply

Why do people deny evolution?

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know