|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
Thread ▼ Details |
Cold Foreign Object  Suspended Member (Idle past 3073 days) Posts: 3417 Joined: |
|
Thread Info
|
|
|
Author | Topic: Status Report: The Invulnerable Refutation of Darwinism | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Cold Foreign Object  Suspended Member (Idle past 3073 days) Posts: 3417 Joined: |
I'd rather masturbate than be a dumbfuck. I don't believe you. Ray
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Cold Foreign Object  Suspended Member (Idle past 3073 days) Posts: 3417 Joined: |
Ancestor of apes or an ancestor that was an ape? When you claim this in your thesis Ray, what is the reference that you supply to support it? Charles Darwin: "We thus learn that man is descended from a hairy quadruped, furnished with a tail and pointed ears, probably arboreal in its habits, and an inhabitant of the Old World. This creature, if its whole structure had been examined by a naturalist, would have been classed amongst the Quadrumana, as surely as would the common and still more ancient progenitor of the Old and New World monkeys" (Descent Of Man 1871:389, Vol.2). Are you claiming that you did not know that evolutionary theory claims mankind to descend from the lower animals, apes, "hairy quadruped-tail-pointed ears? Are you claiming not to know that idiots with shovels have been digging in Africa for decades convinced that man evolved from an ape-like creature that lived millions of years ago? Since the implication is unavoidable (gutter racism) I can understand why you might be feigning ignorance about the main claim of evolution concerning the origin of mankind. Ray
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Cold Foreign Object  Suspended Member (Idle past 3073 days) Posts: 3417 Joined: |
off topic!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! This comment acknowledges defeat in our exchanges and attempts to signal a Moderator to provide some satisfaction on the intellect who beat him up. Ray
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Cold Foreign Object  Suspended Member (Idle past 3073 days) Posts: 3417 Joined: |
So, does science say we evolved from apes or an 'ape like' creature? Science says Genesis is correct: we originated from the first man, Adam. Scientism says we originated from an ancient ape ancestor, that at some point, millions of years ago, began to morph into a man. I noticed that you, like all evolutionists, avoided the Darwin quote like the plague. LOL! Ray
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Cold Foreign Object  Suspended Member (Idle past 3073 days) Posts: 3417 Joined: |
Shouldn't you even have some knowledge of how science works if you are purporting to make an argument that affects science? How long has it been now since you stopped beating your wife? Ray
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Cold Foreign Object  Suspended Member (Idle past 3073 days) Posts: 3417 Joined: |
Seriously though Ray, what exactly are you trying to achieve by posting this thread? We already know that you're working on your magnum opus. You've said already. It's been quite a while since I posted anything at EvC. I just wanted everyone to know that production is still on-going.
We know, the folks at TalkOrigins know Yes, but this is not T.O., this is EvC Forum where I have not posted in quite a while. I didn't want anyone here to think that anything has changed.
the folks at AnswersinGenesis know I did not know that.
the folks at Fundies Say the Darndest Things know Never heard of this site. Ray
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Cold Foreign Object  Suspended Member (Idle past 3073 days) Posts: 3417 Joined: |
It has been almost 150 years and still not one single piece of evidence that falsifies evolution. This comment says there is no evidence in existence that harms evolutionary theory. Before Darwin evolution was a pseudo-science. In fact, in England, before 1859, there was not even one practicing biologist who was a transmutationist----not even one. Darwin simply reinterpreted and reexplained existing evidence----evidence that had been seen as supporting Creationism-Design. After 1879 there was not one respectable biologist in all of North America who was a creationist----not even one. Are we to believe a reexplanation and reinterpretation of previously existing evidence converted the entire biology community in less than 20 years? Apparently so. I am only burdened with explaining why Darwinian evolution was accepted since the evidence was 99 percent unoriginal and already uncovered. Even natural selection was a reexplanation. Both Malthus and Paley had already said that selection and superfecundity would prevent (not drive) evolutionary change. So when you claim that there is no evidence that contradicts evolution you are admitting ignorance of the History of Science. If there is no evidence that contradicts evolution then you are saying that evolution is not falsifiable. Creationism is falsifiable; if evolution is true then Creationism is falsified. Of course evolution is not true; the evidence does not support the claims. Over half of all adults in the U.S. agree. Evolution is pro-Atheism ideology packaged as science. Ray Edited by Cold Foreign Object, : punctuation
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Cold Foreign Object  Suspended Member (Idle past 3073 days) Posts: 3417 Joined: |
Not only do you display ignorance of the ToE, you are also demonstrating quiet clearly that you don't understand the concept of falsifiability. Falsifiability does not mean that there is in fact contradictory evidence. It means that there is possible evidence that, if found, would prove the theory wrong. There are countless possibilities of evidence that could be found that would disprove evolution. I shan't waste my time giving examples as you have already amply shown that you don't understand the ToE anyway, so falsifying evidence would be lost on you as well. It's a bad idea to play the "misunderstanding" or "you do not understand" card since, if objectively applied, could mean that you are the one who is misunderstanding evolutionary theory. It's better to say that you disagree. It is a well known fact that Creationists and Evolutionists disagree. Ray
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Cold Foreign Object  Suspended Member (Idle past 3073 days) Posts: 3417 Joined: |
You are quoted there, though. Immortalized, even. Please show me? Ray
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Cold Foreign Object  Suspended Member (Idle past 3073 days) Posts: 3417 Joined: |
Falsifiability does not mean that there is in fact contradictory evidence. It means that there is possible evidence that, if found, would prove the theory wrong. As phrased no evidence thus exists. You need to stop playing games. Everyone knows what falsifiability means. Evolutionists have stuck their foot in their mouth by claiming no evidence exists that contradicts evolution. This belief is prima facie evidence supporting the general claim that evolution is a religion.
There are countless possibilities of evidence that could be found that would disprove evolution. Your comments prove that it is you who does not understand falsifiability. The same simply means ideas and tests specifically produced and applied against a scientific claim to test its veracity. Ray
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024