Why do people deny evolution?

@Quehoniaomath,

Yes, we have. Stop lieing.

0 Replies

@Quehoniaomath,

No' oou idiot, it was TWO list, the 29+ and another one, from I thinmk FBM with five otherr difernt evidences, which wasdn't even talking about Haeckel,which is what yout hal-aed "reply_ delt with, and which you clearly know nothig aout. Presnt da embryologissill do reseah on thr cross-speces similarties of mbryos, and a couple Maxlnckscientists recrtl publishef papers which show sevtsl omparions of speciesontology recaitulating phylogeny. Frther, te textbooks which reproduce Haeckel's illustrtion present it in the context of the history of embryology theory and say it is outmodd today. O your self-claimed 'refutation' fails on all counts. So you don't even gert credit for one refutation, lt alone the other 33 Which rest on completely differernt indpendnt grounddsd. So the score rmains. Evolution 34--quahog zero.

0 Replies

@Quehoniaomath,

Quehoniaomath wrote:

Quote:
Do you agree that micro evolution exists?

yes, but please don't say now that is prove for macro evolution

It might be a hypothesis yes, but we have to PROVE that,

well, so far no one has done that!

I think you don't understand macro evolution. Do you think that is like one generation doesn't have fingers and the next one does? Macro evolution is lots of micro evolution over a long period of time looked at across multiple species. Macro evolution cannot happen without micro evolution. Many thousands of years can make a lot of change. Look what's happened just since the last ice age.

2 Replies

@FBM,

The invisible guy in the sky is nonlocality as relativity in the local event. Or event plus relativity = guy in the sky. If ya notice relativity of life forms changes life forms.

0 Replies

@McGentrix,

Quote:

Macro evolution is lots of micro evolution over a long period of time looked at across multiple species.

EXACTLY what I thought you would do!

Anyway, if you really think this is true (your hypothesis), you need evidence sometimes called prove!

Herein lies the problem THERE IS NO EVIDENCE FOR THIS!

Do you really think only stating that micro evolution=macro evolution (Macro evolution is lots of micro evolution ) does the trick?

no way jose!!!!

unbelievable what people people do to defence their crap!

1 Reply

@Quehoniaomath,

That is simply another rant. You adduce no evidence to validate your position. You still haven't dealt with the 30+ evidences ( only a very partial list) of evidences for macroevolution. Why so afraid to face the truth, quahog?

2 Replies

@McGentrix,

Yes, loopy tho it is, that's what he thinks,as he's said several times.

0 Replies

@MontereyJack,

Code:

That is simply another rant. You adduce no evidence to validate your position. You still haven't dealt with the 30+ evidences ( only a very partial list) of evidences for macroevolution. Why so afraid to face the truth, quahog?

rant? afraid? lol
it wasn't 30+ it was 29, I explained one away

But hoaxes don't count now, do they?

1 Reply

@MontereyJack,

Quote:

You adduce no evidence to validate your position

Now, use this same question and aim at the fundamentilists religious evolutionists!

Why don't you do that?

I have nothing to proof, I am awaiting, never coming, proof from the fumdamental-religious-evolutionist camp.

For months now! Why don't they deliver?

That is simple, there is none.

1 Reply

@Quehoniaomath,

Snakes with little tootsy toes is proof.

1 Reply

@martinies,

Quote:

Snakes with little tootsy toes is proof.

lol. yes you are funny! Like the 'legs' of the whales for sure?! lol

1 Reply

@Quehoniaomath,

I repeat. There were TWO lists, one with 29+ points' the other wit5. You nswered NONR of the points.. Your supposed "answee_ dealt with Ern?st Haeckel' whose materill was not among any of thos points' which still stn. The evidence is ther. Unttil you come up with 34 omplete arguments you remain as charlatan and evolution erigns unchallenged.

1 Reply

@MontereyJack,

Quote:

I repeat. There were TWO lists, one with 29+ points' the other wit5. You nswered NONR of the points.. Your supposed "answee_ dealt with Ern?st Haeckel' whose materill was not among any of thos points' which still stn. The evidence is ther. Unttil you come up with 34 omplete arguments you remain as charlatan and evolution erigns unchallenged.

Now english please.

1 Reply

@Quehoniaomath,

I merely do battle with a balky tablet keyboard. You do battle wit logic itslf, which refuses to contort itslf for you.

1 Reply

@MontereyJack,

Quote:

I merely do battle with a balky tablet keyboard. You do battle wit logic itslf, which refuses to contort itslf for you.

Well, just change the text so I can read it calmly.
It hurts my eyes, mate.

I don't battle with logic at all.

No problem to see that if there is no evidence the theory is wrong, very wrong.

macr0 evolution is obsolete. But that seems to be too troubling fro you.

I really wonder why that is,

0 Replies

@Quehoniaomath,

Yes the bones in whale fins are the way they are because they have evolved that way from legs that onced existed in a form of life that gave its genetics to a future form with an adapted purpose relativly convenient to the event environment. So that a nonlocal thing which is relativity is the changing force in the on going local event. So the inherent relativity is the chooser of the direction a form will take both in physics and in life. Relativity is the nonlocal chooser of direction of any state. Relativity is what consciousness is. Consciousness relatively collapses wave function in qm.

2 Replies

@martinies,

Any life form by its own existance has an inherent relativity in nature and that relativity is nonlocality or god.

1 Reply

@martinies,

Quote:

Yes the bones in whale fins are the way they are because they have evolved that way from legs that onced existed in a form of life that gave its genetics to a future form with an adapted purpose relativly convenient to the event environment.

Nope, sorry for that but nope.

1 Reply

Quote:

So that a nonlocal thing which is relativity is the changing force in the on going local event. So the inherent relativity is the chooser of the direction a form will take both in physics and in life. Relativity is the nonlocal chooser of direction of any state. Relativity is what consciousness is. Consciousness relatively collapses wave function in qm.

What bollocks are you talking here, mate?
If you talking einsteins relativity and also quantumphysics, well they are both wrong.

But this is gobbledygook.

0 Replies

@martinies,

Quote:

Any life form by its own existance has an inherent relativity in nature and that relativity is nonlocality or god.

gobbledygook , again.

1 Reply

Why do people deny evolution?

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know