Why do people deny evolution?

What kind of stupid question forbids the debate of the very answers it seeks to ask?? Your opinion is that Evolution is proven beyond a doubt, but that is incorrect. You think your asking a question like why people may think the world is flat (if you could find such people) where you have absolute Truth behind you... That is your stance, but in this case you dont have that level of truth behind you. What you do have is a theory mostly made of very clever assumptions - 'human' assumptions, supported by fossil evidence, which is more likely to be true than not, but not guaranteed to be true.... were mostly 'assuming' it will 'eventually' be proven to be true, but were not there yet, not by a long shot!

What is there to understand about a fool who likes to see himself in print with his automatic knee jerk reactionary garbage with respect to mainstream epistemology based on shifting paradigmatic cohesion as opposed your facile mis-application of what 'IS' or IS 'NOT' . Big deal ..you've discovered that interpretations can change ...that scores 5 marks on Philosophy of Science 101...not enough to stop you flunking the course !

You a just a parasite..a loser with nothing to say except a facile 'no it ain't' .

sure, whatever you say.

where do these girls come from????

Quote:’What you do have is a theory mostly made of very clever assumptions - 'human' assumptions, supported by fossil evidence, which is more likely to be true than not, but not guaranteed to be true....’

I agree completely with your statement about the theory of evolution being built upon faulty assumptions.
Dating techniques are loaded with assumptions, whether it be tree ring dating, ice layer dating, rock dating, u name it. There are hundreds of methods, but every single one of them yields unreliable results.
In other words, their assumptions dictate their conclusions of an ‘old earth.’

As for fossil evidence, it boils down to nothing more than interpretation.
Here:
http://evolutiondismantled.com/transitional-fossils

To sum it up, as this article explains about the most common cited examples by evolution....
‘no fossil can be counted as a transitional fossils. ‘

Ie. Just because some birds have claws, and some reptiles have claws does not make it related no more than a car and airplane both having tires and claiming they are related because of such similarities. But this is the logic behind evolutionist thinking, and the foundation of their arguments Regarding fossils.
Very simple.

Also keep in mind evolutionists examine and interpret Fossils through the lens that life is ‘simple’ and can be created by unintelligent forces like ‘chemical soups’ in ocean vents. Which scientific observations have revealed quite the opposite. Casting massive doubt on the accuracy of their interpretations as well.
Thoughts?

whats so conspiratorial about assumptions built into the fossil record. Any idiot can understand em

1Fossils represent remains of ancient lifeforms. (OK? got it?)

2 These lifeforms are preserved in many different ways (Still with me?)

3Fossils are arranged according to a time sequence in the rock that contains them

4We can date both the fossils nd or the sediment containing them by at last 20 different overlapping techniques

5These techniques are done using several different types to "date" one specimen.

6We can see that fossils of lifeforms that appear "higher up" in the stratigrphy are actually younger in age ,and therefore may be descended from earlier fossil forms.

7All the phyla of lifeforms on earth (plants, animals, archea I-IV, protista, ) can be traced as to their linneages only if the geological sedient sequences are preserved. Many linneages hqve "gaps" due to missing geologic sequences.



When you look at it, these assumptions arent that difficult to wrap your brain around, and theres really no ATHEISTIC dangers in them, and , save the concept that the BIBLE insists that alllife was created within a single episode of time, most religions fully understand and accept what the fossil record says.


ALL EXCEPT FOR YOU FUNDAMENTALISTS, like the Jehovah's Witnesses or the Missouri Synod of Lutherans, and SOuthern Baptists, (And a bunch of small really wackadoo sects whose entire catechisms are built on one or two phrases from the Bible that guarantee immunity from poisons or snakebites or Lyme Disease. We all know what happens to preachers who allow themselves to be snake bitten, we call em :The LATE Reverend (insert name here).
You guys make believe that the Bible constitutes science, and further claim that science is evil. THATS JUST NUTZ.
Science (good science) has never claimed that its got all the answers. You guys just claim that we claim that we do. Its really among the only weapons youve got because You all jut run and hide from ppresenting any evidence to support your beliefs.

Some selective editing, but as fine an answer as we're likely to get.

You definitely seem well educated with evolutionism,(like any religious guru) yet, so terribly misinformed. (Kinda like being ‘brainwashed’ or only fed one side of the story your whole life.) Like a judge in a court case who has only received one view of the evidence.....

So, Points one and two for the most part we can agree on.

Your third point is where you begin to go wrong. You see, that is just one interpretation of the evidence.
The fossils in the rock layers can be interpreted not as to when they lived but rather WHERE they lived. Ocean dwelling creatures for the most part were buried first in the Flood u see? Then animals/birds n ppl were ‘last’ or on ‘top.’ U see?
Interpretations interpretations.



Your fourth point Regarding dating techniques does not cover the fact that they are all flawed with their own assumptions, causing old age results. For example, when evolutionists measure radioactive decay, they assume it HAs always been *CONSTant*
They take the measured Rate at today’s visible Rate and apply it as it has Always been at that ‘speed’ of decay! Just google it😉

Here’s a simple example. When counting tree rings if a person assumes the rings are annual and consistent, a person can end up with a superficial age because we know tree rings can grow multiple per year. Therefore what looks old, and can be dated as old, is actually much younger in age. Likewise with all dating techniques in one shape or form, rather cool to know.
This is what you were leaving out to deceive yourself and others. Or you were just uninformed of such.

As far as your tree of life goes, that is like saying a car with no wheels is ‘older’ and down at the bottom of the tree of life ya know? It carries no weight. Just another interpretation.

Also keep in mind, while on the subject of how assumptions can dictate conclusions:
Evolutionists are also guilty of looking at the world around us with flesh eating everywhere.... and then they Interpret the evidence like fossils and apply such an observation to the Ancirnt past ( they assume flesh eating has always been a constant as well )
U see? By making such assumptions it paints a whole different picture of the ancirnt past.Scientist have to majorly assume that It was not vegetarian originally at the dawn of time.

Assumptions. Interpretations. Important.

My third point is qhere your lck of knowledge shows. While many fossils can be buried via water, mot are deposited within Standing waters and beach eposits. You think geologits jut stand around like you guessing about environments of deposition. We trin our students to be able to eptermine the WHAT KIND of environment we are looking at. I would imagine that even you could tell the difference twixt a muddy bottom swamp from and ash deposit from a volcano. Its really no interpretation, its a FACT borne of strong forensic evidence that points to the conlusion.

One of my areas of exprtise IS geologic dating. So you think that we only measure rings from ONE tree? or that we dont do chemical blation studies based on determining the repetition of annular rings? We also compre very old tree ring cross plots with thermoluminescences and Electron spin resonance of the sediments in which the trees are enclosed.

There are several really good detailled papers and methodology books that are written by Catholic Priests who are geochronologists.

And lastly, we do isotope geochronology by the annum-second, not the year. Your Dr "Dino" and the late Duane Gish showed how ill equipped they were at critiquing radioisotope age dating because they didnt understand how half lives are calculated nd what a decay constant even means. Youre not in your comfort zone H&G. This is a technique that hasdefind error bar that allows us to determine rather an accurate +/- factor.
Many of the Creationists are still trying to prove that they can use C14 to age date dinosaurs when its been shown that the "scientists "who submitted samples to the Ga Tech geochron lab, were punked by being given samples that were ebedded and covered with thinned out lcquers or a 1/2 pound cut of shellac. This gave phony young dates because there was new carbon from the paint that was applied onto the samples.

Who would do silly thinking like that. Paleo is like a forensic science investigation. In order to see what was the older car, why not just look at their VIN numbers and /or reg papaers in the glove box?

Only Creationist/IDers do that "tire" thing, and then feeling how clever they are for not buying it.

Evolution... what we think we know about it is going to change 'significantly' over time as we discover more, and allot of theories are going to be dropped and new ones taking their place. So with that in mind, why do evolutionists sit so comfortably on their arrogant throne?? One example is this idea that humans never existed along side dinosaurs. That is likely to be true, however, who is to say that a discovery in the future won't prove that wrong? You dont know? SO DONT BE ARROGANT
Mark my words, there will be discoveries in the future that will turn Evolution inside out, and the theory of evolution will itself continue to evolve!
Just think about what evolution will look like in 500 years? Do you really expect it to look in any way similar to what it is today? Think about it.

we only say things that seem to be supported by evidence. Dinosaurs and humans, based on geologic evidence, seem to be separated by at least 63 million years. We dont "sit on any thrones" Noone admits that its the last word because, as you say, new evidence may just be around the outcrop.
HOOWWWEVVVERRR, Right now, it seems that Alley Oop did not need a saddle to ride his pet Apatosaur, because there werent any around.

Wheres your evidence??? Your entire argument here is not so much based on support of your "belief" but based on takin a cheap shot at science eh?

Maybe youre a friend of H&G, all I have to say is that you need to work a bit more to come up with something more persuasive.


Time for din din

I can guarantee that evolutionary theory will "evolve" over the decades and millenia. However, Ill bet that Genesis story of the all once and done Creationwill remain the same story that its been for the last 1000 years

So after ridiculing me, you then agree with me..... hmmmmmm
Its also possible they could one day dig up some ancient writings that will change the creationist story!

If you must know, yes i am a Christian, but i also accept Evolution, to the extent that God has done that so as not to be discovered by science. I do wonder if Evolution actually went through all those processes or did God simply snap his fingers and plant the evidence? Hmmmmm? Personally i think it is a combination of both of the above.
But at some point one does wonder was it really necessary for God to go to such great lengths not to be discoverable? Were not finding anything on Earth or in space? Ok so the result is, you now have a planet full of evolutionists...... hmmmmmm?

Edit: i have wondered if there is not some element of 'prime directive' that you see in Star Trek (yes i am a fan) that also motivated God to hide himself from us? We are supposed to do this on our own and the world is what we make it?

I really enjoyed this bit of your treatise.

This mistik character is just a laugh riot.

My shtik mind



His ability to hide himself is legendary.



I wonder how many times I've been had
And I wonder if my dreams are that mad
I wonder how much skoolin I got
I wonder if I know whether or not
I wonder I wonder, wonder I do

uhhhh, we better tell the Jew that Lizard aint kosher. He looks like hes fondling a lamb chop.

whats to disagree with Dr Obvious.?? You try to hide the point of my derision that Creationist thinking will probably remain "Free" of any additional thinking in coming years. True Creationists are sold on the Bibles total inerrancy, and, as another A2Ker has said"If science is right then the Bible is garbage"

You are what we call a" believer in Theistic Evolution (TE)". Lots of people belong to that club. It has its place for those who want to dip their toes into the pond of science , but dont want to break with their religions too much.(Its kinda lazy thinking because youll nver delve too deeply if your worldview is challenged too much or dont want to because theres some homework required)
I started out as a Catholic SChool trained TE kid who was told by Jesuit Chemist,Brother Stew to only obey a single rule that was (I paraphrase Fr Stew) " In science we dont stop our work at a point where we can just go AHHHHH DONE ---go further"

Theistic evolution and ID are sorta where on can sayyy AHHHHH! Done.

Naaah , theres much counter evidence that doesnt FIT the T. E./ID mold.

Quote:’as another A2Ker has said"If science is right then the Bible is garbage"

Yeah, that was me, but of course you substituted evolutionism for science.

Do you have any half monkey and half man photos as well?
Btw, Lots of people have reptiles as pets.
I’m sure it was much more common before sin entered the world