132
   

Why do people deny evolution?

 
 
farmerman
 
  1  
Fri 9 May, 2014 11:51 am
@Finn dAbuzz,
"effective" assumes an expected result, having a purpose.

Im no "purist" when it comes to trout fishing, Ill use worms if I feel like. I garden my tomatoes well before Late May, and I, like Frank, actually like a lot of rap music. Im certainly not a purist in anything. I do , however, like precision in thought, IF NOT IN SPELLING.
Jut lave it lie there, I shant chide you further on such a basic issue.
Finn dAbuzz
 
  0  
Fri 9 May, 2014 12:01 pm
@farmerman,
Personally, I do think there is a Divine purpose to evolution, but neither you nor I can settle that question definitively, and that wasn't the purpose of my using the word effective anyway.

But thanks for your promise to leave a numbskull like me alone for now.
0 Replies
 
spendius
 
  0  
Fri 9 May, 2014 01:44 pm
@farmerman,
I'll chide you further fm. Where is your answer to the question I asked you? Your evolutionist fans won't be able to think straight on the matter without your guidance. They'll end up not knowing whether they are evolutionists or Christian sentimentalists.

Maybe a haircut is in order if your scientific nerve has failed. Everybody knows endogamy is fatal to evolution and those ladies are set to avoid it.

You look like you are admitting that there are some subjects that evolutionists are too genteel to consider. Many more that this one.

I was myself abducted at 18 and thrown into the company of city lads who polluted my innocence all to **** and look how I turned out. I can still clearly remember the first photo of city life that they showed me. I was astonished.
0 Replies
 
edgarblythe
 
  1  
Fri 9 May, 2014 01:54 pm
@farmerman,
Jeez, fm, Tweedledum and Tweedledumber have you stumped now. Drunk
spendius
 
  0  
Fri 9 May, 2014 02:01 pm
@Finn dAbuzz,
Quote:
If it didn't effect the rise of Homo sapiens


An evolutionist cannot accept that any "rise" has taken place. Darwin made that quite clear. The idea that man is the pinnacle of biological evolution is enough to make a cat laugh.

Cod evolutionists are another matter. They decide for themselves what to accept. You can imagine the theological cracks they have slipped down with such self-justifying and anti-scientific mannerisms. Not that it is very well mannered mind trying to get others to follow them bearing in mind the unfortunate dispositions to be found there.

The evolutionist position on the Nigerian schoolgirls is simple and clear.

0 Replies
 
farmerman
 
  1  
Fri 9 May, 2014 02:33 pm
@edgarblythe,
finn always makes sure that he can remove himself from any self imposed "corners". I have no idea what spendi is talking about since Ive already stated that hiss most recent question was inane anyway.

I shall now retire to grille up some brats with onions.
spendius
 
  0  
Fri 9 May, 2014 03:07 pm
@edgarblythe,
It doesn't matter who has him stumped ed. It is the fact of him being stumped that matters. In full view.

I'm surprised at you sticking labels of your own choice on who has fm stumped thinking that they somehow prove he's not stumped or only stumped a little bit. It shows you underestimate the intelligence of readers here as if they will fall for such a soft trick.

What's your evolutionist stance on the abduction of 200 odd, they haven't got the count right yet, teenage virgins in Nigeria. Some of them might end up better fixed than what their village has to offer.

One father I saw was weeping while saying that he didn't know how he could manage without his daughter.
spendius
 
  0  
Fri 9 May, 2014 03:17 pm
@farmerman,
It's a great way to avoid answering a question is declaring it to be "inane" or any other mush of the same order. It works every time.

It's a bit embarrassing though. At least you have the decency to leave the room.
farmerman
 
  1  
Fri 9 May, 2014 03:29 pm
@spendius,
why isn't it inane?
edgarblythe
 
  2  
Fri 9 May, 2014 03:56 pm
@spendius,
I don't underestimate people's intelligence. Most regular posters are quite intelligent. It's the willingness to stonewall a subject or make charges that are simply untrue that gets me to posting. You guys are like mosquitoes buzzing fm and not able to draw a speck of blood.
spendius
 
  0  
Fri 9 May, 2014 04:57 pm
@farmerman,
Quote:
why isn't it inane?


Because it is a big international story with US and UK military input and an evolutionist should have a position on it from an evolutionary perspective.

But I understand your coy responses.
farmerman
 
  1  
Fri 9 May, 2014 05:06 pm
@spendius,
I need to understand your connection twixt my positions on naturl selection nd the recent kidnapping of the schoolgirls in Nigeria.
Its a tragedy and the perps should be dealt with harshely and perhqps, even mde an example of. However, is there a connection to evolution I am missing here?
Perhaps you should alert the media.
spendius
 
  0  
Fri 9 May, 2014 05:06 pm
@edgarblythe,
Quote:
I don't underestimate people's intelligence.


Of course you do. You tried to trick members by using the phrase "Tweedledum and Tweedledumber" to play down fm being stumped when he is actually stumped all ends up.

It is a scientific fact that exogamy is a key driver of evolution. Cross cultural fertilisation. Are you making out that morality trumps biology? That would be a turn up for the book.
farmerman
 
  1  
Fri 9 May, 2014 05:07 pm
@edgarblythe,
You are too kind.
0 Replies
 
spendius
 
  1  
Fri 9 May, 2014 05:15 pm
@farmerman,
Quote:
However, is there a connection to evolution I am missing here?


Of course. It is you being an evolutionist only in certain circumstances which is not a position you take on gravity.

I don't believe you don't understand the point.

As an evolutionist you can only look at problems biologically. That's why most people deny evolution.
spendius
 
  1  
Fri 9 May, 2014 05:20 pm
@spendius,
From what I have read the Watson of DNA fame would understand the point.

Isn't endogamy the weak spot in the eugenics movement?
farmerman
 
  1  
Fri 9 May, 2014 05:21 pm
@spendius,

Quote:
As an evolutionist you can only look at problems biologically(sic)

You misspelled "logically" theres no "bio" in it


edgarblythe
 
  1  
Fri 9 May, 2014 05:22 pm
@spendius,
The name sticks, because of the way youse guys are presenting yourselves.
spendius
 
  1  
Fri 9 May, 2014 05:24 pm
@farmerman,
Quote:
You misspelled "logically" theres no "bio" in it


Your Catholic upbringing is peeping out old boy.
0 Replies
 
spendius
 
  1  
Fri 9 May, 2014 05:24 pm
@edgarblythe,
You're not up for this ed.
 

Related Topics

 
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.24 seconds on 11/17/2024 at 10:30:15