Can you prove evolution wrong? -- Part 2

a reply to: turbonium1

All the evidence we have leads us to only one conclusion - that all species were created as those species, that they all have remained those species, and always will be those species. If the species becomes extinct, it ends that species, forever afterward. What you are trying to do is suggest all the evidence is not true, does not matter, and in essence, that it does not even exist!

To date, you have not provided any evidence, only your opinion. If your opinion is not backed up by evidence, it's irrelevant. Just like Cooperton, you're trying to shove an idea down everyone's throat without an explanation.

Your opinion is dead wrong - and the evidence, scientific evidence that is, not opinions - proves that you're wrong. That you haven't even read, much less studied, the evidence, is your problem. You can state a false opinion (like Cooperton once again) until hell freezes over and it still will be dead wrong.

Willful ignorance is a craft unto itself. You've got that one down quite well.

Evidence is not stacks of paper that assume evolution is real, and try to fit long extinct fossils to the fantasy..

You claim evolution of all species on Earth is a continual process, but no evidence supports your claim, anywhere...

All species are the same species, look around the world, and try to prove this is not true. You cannot, and never will.

originally posted by: turbonium1
Evidence is not stacks of paper that assume evolution is real, and try to fit long extinct fossils to the fantasy..

You claim evolution of all species on Earth is a continual process, but no evidence supports your claim, anywhere...

All species are the same species, look around the world, and try to prove this is not true. You cannot, and never will.

This makes no sense whatsoever and is yet more proof that you are trolling for reactions.

Nobody found any dinosaur fossils in the ground for thousands of years, which supports the argument that no dino-land ever DID exist on Earth.

The other reason dino-land never existed is that all sorts of dinosaur fossils suddenly were discovered after 1890 or so. As if nobody dug up soil, before then!!

By an amazing coincidence, Rockefeller controlled all our oil, at the same time, and somehow, he knew oil was created by dino-fossils! He even put a little dino-figure on his logo, for he knew oil was fossil fuel, of course...

By another amazing coincidence, Darwin published his theory of evolution, around the same time, which worked out remarkably well, with so many dino-fossils being found so quickly, for some reason or other.


If you ever look back, to see nobody find a dino-fossil for thousands of years, until they had oil, and evolution, and suddenly, dino-bones are all being discovered, in a few years, then you might get a clue about the whole ruse.


If dinosaurs were not known to exist for thousands of years, how could they find all sorts of dino-fossils suddenly, indicates it was purely nonsense to begin with. And the ruse goes onward, up to this very day

I forgot to mention another amazing coincidence - dating of all those fossils was now possible, too...

They found out how dinosaurs were on Earth many millions of years ago. Amazing, indeed. Ancient beasts that roamed the Earth, way before humans, who were ape-lings at the time, and evolved into humans millions of years later on...


All of this is pure crap, in reality.

Evolution has now become so established as a so-called science, as if it were all factual, that the current scientists accept it as all true, because their papers start from this point, assuming evolution is all true, and they try to fit every fossil into the story....it is a sad sight, indeed.

Yes.... sad

After seeing every species on Earth is still the exact same species, over thousands of years, it really is sad to see them ignore all of this evidence, and try to fit extinct species into a worthless theory, which has nothing else to go on..

Oh well.

originally posted by: turbonium1
After seeing every species on Earth is still the exact same species, over thousands of years, it really is sad to see them ignore all of this evidence, and try to fit extinct species into a worthless theory, which has nothing else to go on..

Oh well.

You've been saying this ad infinitum with absolutely no proof. Provide the proof, not just your opinion. Thanks.

a reply to: turbonium1

Only thing worthless is your opinion.

If you have a better explanation for the origin of species then give it and back it up with evidence. If your opinion is based on what some ancient text documenting the stories told by primitives that hadn't even discovered the wheel then it remains worthless.

While you compile your evidence which we both know you don't have the rest of the world will keep moving forward.

originally posted by: turbonium1
After seeing every species on Earth is still the exact same species, over thousands of years, it really is sad to see them ignore all of this evidence, and try to fit extinct species into a worthless theory, which has nothing else to go on..

Oh well.

You have thousands of years of recorded observations?

originally posted by: Grimpachi
a reply to: turbonium1

Only thing worthless is your opinion.

If you have a better explanation for the origin of species then give it and back it up with evidence. If your opinion is based on what some ancient text documenting the stories told by primitives that hadn't even discovered the wheel then it remains worthless.

While you compile your evidence which we both know you don't have the rest of the world will keep moving forward.

You assume that an 'original species' came into existence first, and it later branched out, creating all other species on Earth, then?


There is no evidence to support this argument, at all.


The evidence supports a very different argument, that's all we really know at this point.


Arguing for an origin of life, from nothing, which hatched all other life forms afterwards, is a ridiculous argument to make, that's the main problem here.

It's ignorant, really.


This is like a bumpkin trying to explain how airplanes were created, without a clue to start with.

He sounds like an idiot, trying to explain it.


Same thing with 'evolution', too...

originally posted by: TzarChasm

originally posted by: turbonium1
After seeing every species on Earth is still the exact same species, over thousands of years, it really is sad to see them ignore all of this evidence, and try to fit extinct species into a worthless theory, which has nothing else to go on..

Oh well.

You have thousands of years of recorded observations?

All your ancestors were also human, no?

Do you need to have an actual record, of your ancestors being human, before you accept it as evidence?


Is that what you are trying to argue here?

originally posted by: turbonium1

originally posted by: TzarChasm

originally posted by: turbonium1
After seeing every species on Earth is still the exact same species, over thousands of years, it really is sad to see them ignore all of this evidence, and try to fit extinct species into a worthless theory, which has nothing else to go on..

Oh well.

You have thousands of years of recorded observations?

All your ancestors were also human, no?

Do you need to have an actual record, of your ancestors being human, before you accept it as evidence?


Is that what you are trying to argue here?

I was talking about your claim that all the species on Earth today are exactly the same as thousands of years ago.

originally posted by: turbonium1

originally posted by: TzarChasm

originally posted by: turbonium1
After seeing every species on Earth is still the exact same species, over thousands of years, it really is sad to see them ignore all of this evidence, and try to fit extinct species into a worthless theory, which has nothing else to go on..

Oh well.

You have thousands of years of recorded observations?

All your ancestors were also human, no?

Do you need to have an actual record, of your ancestors being human, before you accept it as evidence?


Is that what you are trying to argue here?

Dude, give up the ghost. You are making your cause look worse than it already is.

originally posted by: turbonium1
Nobody found any dinosaur fossils in the ground for thousands of years, which supports the argument that no dino-land ever DID exist on Earth.

This is complete rubbish. Please support this with something resembling a citation. Don’t look too hard because you won’t find one because your assertion is entirely false

The other reason dino-land never existed is that all sorts of dinosaur fossils suddenly were discovered after 1890 or so. As if nobody dug up soil, before then!!

Reality just isn’t your thing is it? One false narrative after another with zero basis in reality. Typing it online doesn’t make it true. No matter how many sentences in a row you dedicate to repeating lies.

By an amazing coincidence, Rockefeller controlled all our oil, at the same time, and somehow, he knew oil was created by dino-fossils! He even put a little dino-figure on his logo, for he knew oil was fossil fuel, of course...

No, the reason it was called fossil fuel is that in Europe, anything that was dug out of the ground was called a fossil. Rocks, artifacts...
Literally anything that came out of the ground. Where did oil come From? Not from drilling wells into the ground was it?!?!

By another amazing coincidence, Darwin published his theory of evolution, around the same time, which worked out remarkably well, with so many dino-fossils being found so quickly, for some reason or other.

Dinosaur fossils had been collected and catalogued for centuries. Your insistence that none were located until the late 19th century is entirely false.

If you ever look back, to see nobody find a dino-fossil for thousands of years, until they had oil, and evolution, and suddenly, dino-bones are all being discovered, in a few years, then you might get a clue about the whole ruse.

The only ruse is the one you fell for when they told you reading was satans entrance point to your soul.

If dinosaurs were not known to exist for thousands of years, how could they find all sorts of dino-fossils suddenly, indicates it was purely nonsense to begin with. And the ruse goes onward, up to this very day

For someone who can’t recognize their own nonsense despite it being the only thing you can apparently type, I find this comedy routine to be getting a little stale. You. Have. No. Clue. What. You. Are. Talking. About.

The fossilized remains of extinct animals were discussed by Aristotle in his 10 volume ‘History of Animals. I’m quite certain he was no longer alive when On the Origin of Species was published or 1890 which you claim is when fossils were first found. Are you afraid of reading books or just learning in general? Maybe we could reference Pliny’s ‘Natural History’. Maybe you want to discuss how Europeans were digging up the remains of Pleistocene Megafauna in N. America in the 16th century. Extinct species were known about and understood long before the 1890’s, Rockefeller or any oil consortiums. Please do some research prior to making yourself look ridiculous.

a reply to: peter vlar

Hes a flat earther man...

Most utterly clueless person that posts on this site... probably ever

a reply to: Akragon

Oh I know. And to be honest, my replies to this particular ilk of poster is more to correct their blatant lies for lurkers than it is for the poster themself. It’s pretty obvious when you’re talking to a tree stump around here.

Since when did I ever say extinct species didn't exist, or were not ever found, before?

I mentioned extinct species we SAW go extinct in fact, which never 'evolved' into other species, either. You don't mention any of those species, for some reason....

I earlier had referred to all those extinct species suddenly being 'discovered', which are claimed to be the 'ancestors' of other species, and this is what I called utter nonsense.


And claiming oil came from dino-bones, which is also complete crap.

Look, before you go on spouting more nonsense, next time.

originally posted by: turbonium1
Since when did I ever say extinct species didn't exist, or were not ever found, before?

Right here genius-

originally posted by: turbonium1 Nobody found any dinosaur fossils in the ground for thousands of years, which supports the argument that no dino-land ever DID exist on Earth.

I mentioned extinct species we SAW go extinct in fact, which never 'evolved' into other species, either. You don't mention any of those species, for some reason....

Yet I did repeatedly address this false statement when explaining that there are numerous species, genus, families etc... that have gone extinct, when I said that ‘no, there are evolutionary dead ends and not every species can continue to evolve if their genetic lineage is entirely gone whether it be due to population bottleneck, catastrophic change in the local ecological niches, extinction level events or hunted into extinction by members of our genus for the past several million years.

I earlier had referred to all those extinct species suddenly being 'discovered', which are claimed to be the 'ancestors' of other species, and this is what I called utter nonsense.

You can call it whatever you like. It’s just your own uninformed opinion. You haven’t supported a single claim or statement that you’ve made. It’s like sitting a 10 year old down to tell them there is no Santa Claus and the child refuses
To accept that there isn’t a Santa because they feel like their entire childhood is a lie. Your opinions aren’t based in fact or reality. Merely nihilistic denialism.

You stated that Dino fossils hadn’t been found for 1000’s of years until the end of the 19th century and that these fossils were part of some ‘Big Oil’ conspiracy, unsurprisingly you made this claim with no substantiative citations. You make
Your claims as if they are fact based yet not once have you purported to have cited source material for citations.

And claiming oil came from dino-bones, which is also complete crap.

So you claim. You have yet to falsify any of the science indicating just how wrong you are not have you posited a working hypothesis for the formation of oil. As ludicrous as Coops claims and statements are, he at least tried
To support his interpretation of the evidence with citations. He didn’t understand the science any better than you and didn’t realize when he was completely wrong due to his own confirmation biases, but he at least out in a half assed effort to support his conclusions with citations. You aren’t able to do so and know better than to try when you can just Gish Gallop your way over the top and ignore every other sound in the world around you.

And for the record, I made yes claims as to whether or not biological remains from the Carboniferous, Jurassic, Cretaceous, Tertiary, Holocene or any other geological periods, are the origins of fossil fuels. I didn’t need to to explain where the original use of “fossil” or “fossil fuels” stems. I’ve made no claims or statements regarding my opinions or the facts that I believe support my positions related to the geological processes required for the formation of fossil fuels. Just the etymology of the word fossil.

Look, before you go on spouting more nonsense, next time.

This is hilarious coming from someone who can’t even make consistent statements from one post to the next, while ironically moving goalposts to avoid your own glaring errors and lies of omission. And once again, you make claims and statements that aren’t supported by anything aside from your own misinformed personal opinions shaped entirely by confirmation biases while being entirely devoid of facts.