Question Evolution!

And there lies the root of all your misconceptions.
There is a solution to your problem, but it would require you learning - which is obviously a game-breaker for you.You are clearly proud of your ignorance (CCoI anyone?) and are clinging to it with religious fervour.
I doubt anyone will ever break your 'Awesome Grip of Stupid'.

No wonder you're a creationist. This is very, very basic stuff. It's called basic Biology. Even me, who doesn't have English as a first language, knows exactly what the word Mammalia means! And the last Biological training I had was in High School, the year I turned 18.Don't you even know how and why animals are classified the way they are and the nomenclature employed?Do you know why it's done like this? It helps in allowing an English speaking American Biologist to understand exactly what an IsuZulu speaking Biologist writes in a peer-reviewed, scientific article!It also shows your complete lack in basic education.Edited by Pressie, : No reason given.Edited by Pressie, : No reason given.

There are some things that we know about the world. Science tries to fit these things that we know into frameworks of understanding called theories. Your approach to opposing theories you don't accept seems to be to maintain a lack of awareness of things we already know.--Percy

Hi chuck77,Is being an arrogant prick the only reply you have to my post? My request? If you spent a little bit less time with your head shoved up your arse, you would have noticed that we were invited to contact CMI in order to debate this topic.from Message 101It was not a fucking request of ours, it was EvC politely accepting an offer.Alert the news? CMI is the group who are widely advertising that these questions cannot be answered. They are announcing as loud as they can that they cannot be answered. I, and others here at EvC are advising that we are happy to help them answer the questions. CMI should be interested in what we have to saybecause their claims are making them look ignorant. Are you suggesting that CMI is of the same level as the President of the USA? I have emailed an ignorant bunch of creationists who have made an outlandish claim. They have put forward a claim that they have questions that cannot be nswered. I have put forward my claim that they can and offered a place for them to receive the answers they crave.You seem to be complaining that I am willing to answer the questions and challenge CMI directly. But this does not make sense...remember this - Message 44 where you complained that the answers that Panda had provided were insufficient?Or this - Message 111 where you complained that we could not and would not answer the questions?or this - Message 114 where you accused us of ddging the questions?or this - Message 122 where you complained that we were not providing sufficient evidence?or this - Message 161 where you claimed that we should be able to quickly and easily explain answers for the questions?or this - Message 168 where you again complained that it should be easy to explain all the answers to you?remember all of those complaints you made that the questions were not answered to your liking?And what do you do when someone tells you and CMI that they are willing to answer all of the questions and discuss them in an open forum (an act that CMI is not willing to do)?You complain about that too.You sir, are a douche. I mean that literally. I believe that your sole function should be to wash out dirty vaginas.I will be answering the 15 questions. Feel free to remain as ignorant as you choose to be.

Hey Doc, I am not silly. I am also not naive. I doubted that I would receive any response at all.But I know I have put the offer on the table. I know it. And that is what is important.I wont be like them. I will be open and intellectually honest.And besides, I am going to get that fucking Don Quixote award if its the lat thing I do.

Hi Chuck, Fortunately, there exists a solution to that problem; So now you know.Or, alternatively, we will all know that you were too lazy to click on a few hyperlinks and find out.Your choice.Mutate and Survive

Oh, come on. Be reasonable!Who would ever let Chuck near their vagina?

Must....Answer....But....Shouldn't....
*steps away from the 2 week suspension*Edited by Panda, : No reason given.

Quite the opposite. You refuse to read the explanations. Just go to http://www.pubmed.com . Search for "evolution". There are hundreds of thousands of peer reviewed papers waiting for you. You should really take responsibility of your own education and not blame others for your ignorance on a given subject. It would appear that they're not teaching grammar as well as they used to, but yes they are teaching the basics of evolution. Descent with modification and natural selection are the basics. Even then, CMI fails to even understand high school level biology. Their knowledge of biology is more on the 3rd or 4th grade level. What kinds? What kinds? Please list the genetic and morphological criteria for determining whether or not two species belong to the same kind. Then I would contend that we also see it in evolution. Humans and chimps are both apes, as was their common ancestor. Humans and chimps are variations of the ape kind. Humans and bears are both mammals, as was their common ancestor. Humans and bears are variations of the mammal kind. Trout and humans are both vertebrates, as was their common ancestor. Trout and humans are both variations of the vertebrate kind. It would appear that we observe descent with modification as well, just as Darwin claimed.Edited by Admin, : Fix link.

Since evolution is descent with modification, I really don't see how this applies. Evolution clearly states that new species are produced through imperfect biological reproduction that is filtered through natural selection. Both the parents of the next generation and the selective pressures are something, not nothing.

Have you ever seen dirt piled on top of dirt? Do you think there is nothing but bedrock? How blind are you? Evidence please. Our common ancestor. This is really simple, I don't know why you are trying to make it more complicated than it really is.

Just to prevent any miscomprehensions that will take 50 posts to resolve, that should read http://www.pubmed.com .[lurking away]

I understand that you do not accept the theory of evolution or scientific theories of cosmology, and that you believe that creation happened as described in Genesis.But your arguments in this forum consist of nothing more than expressions of personal incredulity and uninformed mockery of science that you quite clearly do not even understand. You are not even trying to make a logical, let alone scientific rebuttal. Are you even trying to be persuasive? And if so, to whom? Buzsaw?It is also pretty clear from the discussion that most posters understand not only the theory of evolution, but also the creation story in Genesis on a level that dwarfs yours. Anyone here could play devil's advocate and do a better job they you are doing. Aren't you even the least bit embarrassed by that state of affairs?At least do the courtesy of pulling up some arguments from AIG or CMI. Edited by NoNukes, : No reason given.

And, of course, the fact is that there is not a Genesis creation story but rather two contradictory and mutually exclusive creation stories in Genesis.

Damn! I was looking forward to talking with the pube doctor...