Don't tell me there's no proof for evolution

@farmerman,

Quote:

As far as standing in front of a jury, I strongly doubt it. Your communications skills arent vested in making convincing arguments. You instead think that random insertions of irrelevancies are capital.Youre an idiot, plain and simple

Oh yeah--that's easy to assert. And probably well practiced. Nobody's going to listen to you lot droning on about soft tissue stuck to old chicken bones.

Proof of evolution doesn't need that stuff. It's a job creation scheme in the lily-white world of " work" (defined as a location of a salary) and all that is produced at great expense to the taxpayer is esoteric words which you even fight over among yourselves as you strain to climb the greasy pole. If it wasn't for Creationists providing you all with a common enemy you would be at each other's throats like rats in a sack.

It looks like you are intent on proving evolution till the cows come home. Over and over again. And whilst insisting that it is proved. Somebody will find some fossilised pollen next which suggests that roses may be related to cabbages and we'll be back with another load of Devonian sediments.

The article said nothing. It was bullshit. I might have my head up my arse but I don't swallow bullshit down greedily.

1 Reply

And all this money that the taxpayer is being fleeced out of could be used to support the troops fighting in the deserts.

It's as if you are trying to prove osmosis by starting with a potato and then going on to radishes and then to turnips and on and on and on with any semi-permiable membrane you can think up so that you can all be scientists.

It's Bullshit City.

0 Replies

@spendius,

Quote:

The article said nothing

. I hear a plea for help in beefing your comprehension skills. However, Im not a remedial reading instructor, youre on yer own there dearie.

1 Reply

@farmerman,

And you're floundering if that mush is your only answer.

0 Replies

In front of a jury I could make you look like a conspiracy of Oliver Twists.

0 Replies

@aperson,

Evolution.No realistic proof.I'm a christian,And everything that is here is from our Al-Mighty Powerful God,our Lord.One tiny single cell,could have not produced this incredible world,and the outer space.Sure there is Deformation,not mutation.Deformation is when the cells in your body don't function properly,Thus the deformed child is born.

Our earthly environment.
1.How has the cell produced,and how did it even start?
For evolutionist,the question is still unknown.
2.How can a cell (1 cell)Turn into what we have now?
No explanation.
3.Is there any possible proof for evolution?
No.
4.Is there any heaven or hell?
Evolution Does not believe in God,Just think they'll die and its the end.

Our wonderful world.
1.If there is no such thing as evolution,how did this all start?
God.God Is Eternal,He is 3 in 1. Father,Son,and Holy Spirit.
He created Light,darkness,night,day,grass,water,man,animals,etc.
2.How was God born/Made?God has been from the beginning of time,Till the end of the world,and will still keep going on.
3.If God is merciful,forgiving,loving,and kind,Why do bad stuff happen to us?
Because we are SINFUL.Adam had eaten the fruit from the tree,which God had told him not too.We are all sellfish,greedy,and unforgiving.
4.If the world was perfect,and Adam and eve were like god why had they sinned against him?The devil had tempted,but of course if they were like God they'd refuse,but God had given them Free will power.
5.If god knew everything,why'd He make the evil spirits?
Evil spirits known as the devil,Who were ounce Holy and Pure.
Again,Angels were created before man,But God had Given them free power to choose their path.Right from wrong,And good from bad.
They sinned and left god and went to Hell,where God divides the good and bad.God has done this all this for a reason,He is The Powerful creator.
6.How do we know if we go to heaven or not?Faith.Know that God had sent his only Son into the world to be - Nailed to the cross,whipped,beaten,hated,and made fun of.Jesus had done all this for us..He went through hell of everyone ever to exist now,in the past in future's sins.He rose on Sunday morning,And went up to heaven,who now sits right side of God.

Evolution is just a theory which has not been proved by anyone.
Christianity is a real belief,proof is everywhere.
Best place is the Bible Wink

If anyone who is not a christian,or does not belief in any sort of God (Atheist)
I suggest to watch this movie:
Passion of the Christ.
Explains everything that had happened To Jesus-Real God,But Human also.
:-)
<3
Love is patient; love is kind; love is not boastful or arrogant or rude. It does not insist on its own way; it is not irritable or resentful; it does not rejoice in wrongdoing, but rejoices in the truth. It bears all things, believes all things, hopes all things, endures all things.
I Corinthians 13: 4-7

3 Replies

@Hailee95,

http://www.poormojo.org/hate/RaptorJesus.jpg

Hailee95, oh man, where to start...

To be put directly and as directly as possible: Your argument is not well educated on this matter. Perhaps you haven't been exposed to what you need to understand scientific theories such as big bang or evolution. It seems that at the most immediate level, you need to educate yourself on scientific methods in general. You need to understand what terms like "theory, law," and "hypothesis" mean. You need to understand what constitutes "evidence" and "proof." After that, you need to be exposed to the real and bountiful store of evidence for big bang and evolution. I'd also note that the two are separate theories as well, and to convolute the two is incorrect.

Additionally, the use of the "special model" scenario is logically false. The promotion of a false dichotomy and then the attack on evolution does not end up proving creationism/ID.

Science only examines the evidence. If there was evidence that the universe and the world was intelligently designed, there would be evidence to support it. There is none to date. If you believe that to be false, feel free to present it.

T
K
O

0 Replies

@Hailee95,

Quote:

Evolution is just a theory which has not been proved by anyone.
Christianity is a real belief,proof is everywhere.
Best place is the Bible

This deserves repeating so that you know what you are up against . "A real belief" trumps objective evidence . The world behind the mirror, full of gods, devils and twisted logic , lies in wait for us all.

0 Replies

@Hailee95,

Quote:

Evolution.No realistic proof.I'm a christian,And everything that is here is from our Al-Mighty Powerful God,our Lord.One tiny single cell,could have not produced this incredible world,and the outer space.Sure there is Deformation,not mutation.Deformation is when the cells in your body don't function properly,Thus the deformed child is born.

Just, wow. I wouldn't be proud of having written this.

Cycloptichorn

1 Reply

@Cycloptichorn,

This is why education is useless in the fundamentalist world. Makes me recall a song from the late 1960s, by Robert Mitchum, called "Tel-E-Vision."

My son want to go to sea
So he join US Navy
They give him test and here's the rub
They find he only suited for watching Mickey Mouse Club

1 Reply

The crucial factor in Hailee's post is that the beliefs expressed, whatever anyone might think of them, provide an anchor for certain values. Values are not free floating entities.

Science has no standards of moral values. Even the idea that scientists should be truthful has no basis in science. It is a Christian value. That such a value is often ignored by avowed Christians is irrelevant.

Why do scientists need peer-reviews if they are trustworthy? They admit with that principle that they need regulating in regard to truth and their motive is self-evidently selfish in that they are merely protecting their reputatiion. Which takes us nowhere if the peer-reviewers are all pissing in the same pot as the bankers seem to have been doing.

Anybody attacking Hailee's anchorage for moral standards has a duty to offer an alternative or admit there isn't one and that all's fair in love and war.

1 Reply

@edgarblythe,

More sciolistic preaching revealing how poorly educated too many Americans have become is fruitless small talk. The drone of this pontificating prattle is what is boring -- I've not had any of my religious friends bring up the Bible or any kind of religion and several of them are Catholics, but if evolution has ever been brought up in conversation, they simply state that the church accepts evolution. The Catholic church remains non-specific as to what their understanding of evolution actually is as they rightly leave that to the scientists. The IDiots and Creationuts unfortunately get into specific details, regardless of the fact that they have made a paltry case against the actual science of evolution. They turn into court jesters, jingling out their obvious pulpit prattle with the ring-a-ding of fake science. There you have boring.

0 Replies

@spendius,

spendius wrote:

The crucial factor in Hailee's post is that the beliefs expressed, whatever anyone might think of them, provide an anchor for certain values. Values are not free floating entities.

What good is an anchor that doesn't reach the sea floor or doesn't have a rope?

spendius wrote:

Science has no standards of moral values. Even the idea that scientists should be truthful has no basis in science. It is a Christian value. That such a value is often ignored by avowed Christians is irrelevant.

Science is not for the purpose of creating values, or standardizing morals. Being truthful however is a tenant of science, and for that reason, many men and women have been ethically guided to report findings that have not supported their beliefs. You think that Christian scientists haven't had to question the significance of their findings in regards to what they believe? Of course they have.

Christians express that they put value in truth, but being truthful is not a unique value to Christians.

spendius wrote:

Why do scientists need peer-reviews if they are trustworthy? They admit with that principle that they need regulating in regard to truth and their motive is self-evidently selfish in that they are merely protecting their reputatiion. Which takes us nowhere if the peer-reviewers are all pissing in the same pot as the bankers seem to have been doing.

Peer review is about evaluating the person's process. It's not some game of trust. I can believe every word you say, but I want to know you came to your conclusion by the most rigorous adherence to the scientific method. Your uneducated views on peer review reek of the most idiotic of conspiracy theories.

spendius wrote:

Anybody attacking Hailee's anchorage for moral standards has a duty to offer an alternative or admit there isn't one and that all's fair in love and war.

Nobody is attacking her moral standard, but she doesn't have a anchorage in science. She needs that anchor if she's going to enter a discussion on evolution. She's welcome to have any moral standard she wants, but you are simply incorrect in asserting that a Christian moral standard is the only standard available or that an individual needs Christianity as an anchor.

As for all being fair in love and war, it's actually not. In terms of morals and values, if Christianity says this, my anchor is superior.

T
K
O

2 Replies

@Diest TKO,

"Certain values" -- man, is that generic, or what?

0 Replies

@Diest TKO,

I wonder if spendi understands there were no christian morals before the time of christ? Also, many countries today do not have christianity as their major religion. spendi is confused by insisting that there is only christian morals.

1 Reply

@cicerone imposter,

There were Hebrew values as far as monotheism (although Egypt made a stab at it and it didn't stick), and the Christians borrowed them with the Old Testament. You're right that even then, there were several other religions who had "moral values." The Hindus, for instance.

1 Reply

@Lightwizard,

Quote:

The Protestant Ethic and the Spirit of Capitalism is a book written by Max Weber, a German economist and sociologist, in 1904 and 1905 that began as a series of essays.

Weber wrote that capitalism evolved when the Protestant (particularly Calvinist) ethic influenced large numbers of people to engage in work in the secular world, developing their own enterprises and engaging in trade and the accumulation of wealth for investment. In other words, the Protestant ethic was a force behind an unplanned and uncoordinated mass action that influenced the development of capitalism. This idea is also known as "the Weber thesis".

Prof. Gellner wrote in 1969-

Quote:

Suppose that the Weberian theory of the role of Calvinism --as forming a type of personality ideally suited for capital accumulation --had come to be formulated, and widely diffused, not at the time when in fact it was, but in the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries. We might then perhaps have found people embracing Calvinism not so much from conviction concerning the tenets internal to it, as in the hope that such a conversion would lead to riches for themselves or at least for their offspring.

The same has been said of Marxism in that it was an ideology which might best prepare the populations of underdeveloped countries for the strains and rigours of industrialisation. Marxist revolutions precede industrialisation just as Calvinism preceded, and was necessary for, capitalism.

But embracing a religion does not necessarily mean embracing its tenets although I can see why its opponents will blithely assume that it does because it makes it a sitting duck for their absurdly simplistic attacks and thus saves them from any intellectual effort as we see on these threads.

Much of the attraction of a religion such as Protestantism is of a more social and useful nature. Calvinism creating capitalism out of nothing for example although I am aware that there are many other complex factors such as urbanisation in an unscientific age and the increasing availability of printed material.

An organised religion provides meeting places for decision making elites and increasing mediation between classes and regions. Golf clubs and Masonic lodges are generally exclusive. The criticisms levelled on here against religion are the equivalent of the childish, maybe envious, criticism of masons that they look a bit daft at the ceremonies. They don't look so daft when they are carving up the real estate though.

Such social gatherings, "under the eyes of God", validate the power and through the marriage market consolidate it thus keeping the propertied class intact and its accumulated wealth being then sufficient to invest in larger and larger enterprises. Steel making for example. Considerations of this sort, which it looks like my friends on here have never even thought about, also apply in the military and political aspects of life besides that of the capitalist expansion of industry.

In today's world religion functions in similar ways throughout the class structure. The creeds, dogmas and the like which are so easy for the superficial critic to focus upon are probably the least important aspect of the business. Having a good dance and singalong and being uplifted temporarily by a charismatic preacher does wonders for poor oppressed people and maybe even inhibits them from going on the warpath.

I'm not convinced atheism can provide any of these facilities.

I'd bet my last shilling that every single one of you fuckers would convert to the most rabid fundamentalism to get at a virgin heiress and a fat contract hidden deep inside Mr Obama's financial outreach programme.

What about the Hindus LW? We have only just taught them how to play cricket. Whether they make it through industrialisation is a moot point.

0 Replies

@aperson,

Well I hope you have calmed down a bit. Nature may select you for a brain hemorrhage.

I agree with you.
Evolution is clearly a fact. I don't know how one who has earnestly studied it could doubt it. But I also don't understand how an honest seeker of truth who has sought out God could not attain belief in him. But there are more than one kind of blindness in truth seeking. I hope you have or will attain a realization of God's existence.

1 Reply

@cavetrollhead,

Quote:

But there are more than one kind of blindness in truth seeking. I hope you have or will attain a realization of God's existence.

Gods "existence" is based solely upon communications left us by members of the "God Industry'. There is nothing that even remotely approaches objective evidence. Surely, if one wishes to follow and accept the existence of a God in the universe, one is freely permitted. Howver, calling it "truth" needs to be upheld by other than quotes from a Bible or a church tradition.

If the traditions of , say, Christianity are truths, why have several imprtant testaments of Christianity been removed from the canon? WHy did the Church, and by extension, all the Protestand sects, choose to remove several conflicting testamenst like "The Jubilees" or the Book of Jerome" (among several others)? Do you think that the churches didnt want to deal with conflicting "testimonial evidence"?

1 Reply

@farmerman,

Even "quotes from the bible" leaves much to be desired, because it is full of contradictions, omissions and mistakes. Any god authoring such a book can't be perfect. Too bad those human writers over 2000 years ago didn't know that one day man would be able to calculate the age of this planet, and prove there has never been a world flood.

0 Replies

Don't tell me there's no proof for evolution

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know