124
   

Why do people deny evolution?

 
 
oralloy
 
  -3  
Reply Sun 15 Sep, 2019 09:56 am
@farmerman,
farmerman wrote:
Cientific Journals are like any other human activity, Imperfect, flawed, and several times product driven. Im rally not aware of any journals that have rejected data because of "leftist lanings".

I've posted several reputable articles about it, as well as the complaints of scientists whose data was suppressed.


farmerman wrote:
Thats a political statement borne out of your inability to provide compelling arguments about your beliefs.

It's borne out of the fact that they've been caught red handed suppressing data that conflicts with the leftist narrative.


farmerman wrote:
Climate Change and Human induced global warming are now clearly visible

So says the biased and useless data.


farmerman wrote:
and no matter how much I hear your bleating against the science behind it, you are flat incorrect.

I am completely correct to point out that global warming hysteria is based on biased and unreliable data.


farmerman wrote:
Youve got nothing,

I've got the fact that global warming hysteria is based on biased and unreliable data.


farmerman wrote:
When your attitude continues to be one of "I aint listening to anything that dosnt agree with me" and then try to find fault with science by just calling it "left wing", you merely provide me with more evidence about your lack of knowledge

I have ample knowledge of the fact that global warming hysteria is based on biased and unreliable data.
MontereyJack
 
  3  
Reply Sun 15 Sep, 2019 11:23 am
@oralloy,
We hace known for a century that CO2 is a greenhouse gas. We've known for decades CO2 in the atmosphere is increasing. There is no question that makes thiongs hotter. Those are known facts. The CO2 will keep increasing. The temperature will keep ging up. The glaciers and ice caps will keep melting. Sea levels will keep rising, imperiling or coasts. Stoems will keep growing in intensity. And ull-heade intransigent deniers will keep denying the plain reality because they're commited to an ideology that denies the science and it's just gonna get ore and more costly to rectify things until it may be too late. The CO2 we pump into the atmosphere stays there for a century and we've been doing it for a century and a half. Stop pettifogging and pay attention to reality for a change rather than factless ideology.
oralloy
 
  -1  
Reply Sun 15 Sep, 2019 11:30 am
@MontereyJack,
I'm not interested in your biased and skewed data. Go try to fool someone more gullible.
MontereyJack
 
  3  
Reply Sun 15 Sep, 2019 12:11 pm
@oralloy,
Your paradigmatic case trying to prove the data were biased blew up in your face. Their conclusion was wrong as asubsequent research proved. What makes you think any of your other "cases" will prove to be anything other than baseless speculation ? The actual physical world continues to contradict your ideology-based "evidence". Fortunately, in this as in so many other of your conjectures, the world is shoving you off in a corner and continuing o ignore you. Your rock, world.
oralloy
 
  -1  
Reply Sun 15 Sep, 2019 12:45 pm
@MontereyJack,
When reality conflicts with leftist ideology, it's not reality that is wrong.
MontereyJack
 
  3  
Reply Sun 15 Sep, 2019 01:23 pm
@oralloy,
Reality is in conflict with what seems strikingly like just another right wing conspirscy theory. The authors of the rejected research were wrong. You could forget the cant and actually look at the many independent lines of research that show the reality of glbal warming. I don't have much hope you're capable of that.
oralloy
 
  -3  
Reply Sun 15 Sep, 2019 01:37 pm
@MontereyJack,
That is incorrect. When reality conflicts with leftist ideology, it's not reality that is wrong.

I'm not interested in looking at your biased and useless data.
0 Replies
 
farmerman
 
  3  
Reply Sun 15 Sep, 2019 03:53 pm
@MontereyJack,
I reallly suspect that hes a few mg. short of a carat
oralloy
 
  -3  
Reply Sun 15 Sep, 2019 03:56 pm
@farmerman,
Your name-calling and personal attacks do little to shore up your shoddy and unreliable data.
farmerman
 
  3  
Reply Sun 15 Sep, 2019 04:06 pm
@oralloy,
I know, and Ive made a bloody good living at it. Pssst, dont tell anyone .
0 Replies
 
MontereyJack
 
  3  
Reply Sun 15 Sep, 2019 04:49 pm
@farmerman,
quite a few.
0 Replies
 
Fil Albuquerque
 
  1  
Reply Sun 15 Sep, 2019 09:02 pm
@JimmyJ,
Because culturally they have evolved to deny it. It gets them more fitness in their tribe echo chamber...
0 Replies
 
Leadfoot
 
  1  
Reply Mon 16 Sep, 2019 06:51 am
@farmerman,
Quote:
Wed be packing curium (Which iotope ya think?) till milk cows evolved to butterflies.

Trouble is, you might even believe that's true. Just thought I'd bring the thread back to the actual subject.

Made any progress on the evolution of whale genitalia I asked you about?
Ought to be really easy after cows to butterflies.
blatham
 
  2  
Reply Mon 16 Sep, 2019 07:24 am
@Leadfoot,
Quote:
Made any progress on the evolution of whale genitalia

That's easy. Evolution wasn't involved. God just wanted a predictable supply of quality leather golf bags.
izzythepush
 
  2  
Reply Mon 16 Sep, 2019 07:26 am
@Leadfoot,
Leadfoot wrote:

Made any progress on the evolution of whale genitalia I asked you about?


If that's what you want to do with your life then go for it. Personally I think you'd make a wonderful prick.
Leadfoot
 
  1  
Reply Mon 16 Sep, 2019 07:59 am
@blatham,
Hey blatham, long time no see.

You see, that's just the point, whales lack the equipment to make golf bags from. I was asking farmer about the process that did that remodeling.
farmerman
 
  4  
Reply Mon 16 Sep, 2019 08:02 am
@izzythepush,
He ignores the entire sequence of whale evolution because hes only interested in following his own "Biblical BS".
I can repeat the facts discovered nd the bases for how the evolution sequence was arrived at but Im afraid , by him not believing it he will dismiss it out of hand.
True science deals with dueling opinions with a host of evidence on either side. So far, the only evidence has been clearly fossil based where the first to speies changed little except for three items. After evolution step no 2 (where the daughter species were much more adapted to full-time aquatic life), we can see the subsequent evolved species (all through time mind you)

He stated that he was interested only in the DNA data and I asked him what DNA data does he have from 50 million or even 3 million year old species)--He did not answer that to any degree of understanding.

I compred him to IONUS who , back then, claimed that e could tell that T rex didnt evolve because of its DNA. (A real scientific miracle)

Sometimes we get caught up on a new technology that e fail to recognize its very limitations.
farmerman
 
  3  
Reply Mon 16 Sep, 2019 08:04 am
@Leadfoot,
I didnt see your post. YOU ARE THE ONE who has failed to present any evience or valid inforomation as to here this Pakecetus DNA has come from??
0 Replies
 
izzythepush
 
  2  
Reply Mon 16 Sep, 2019 08:10 am
@farmerman,
It's like another party and 9/11. Similarly obsessed.
farmerman
 
  2  
Reply Mon 16 Sep, 2019 08:28 am
@izzythepush,
Just ignore it, It gets periodically sent for either electro shock therapy or solitary
 

Related Topics

 
Copyright © 2019 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.03 seconds on 10/20/2019 at 07:01:51