There's the Theory of Evolution and the Interpretation of Evolution

a reply to: turbonium1

No read what I said. Let me try slower for you.

(a) I am religious, just not Abrahamic. My Gods don't claim to create life, or the universe.

(b) The Abrahamic deity is supposed to be all seeing, all powerful, all everything. Yet life is imperfect, thus it seems that the all powerful uberbing, sucks at making things.
thus
(c) If we are created, it is by an imbecile.

originally posted by: AngryCymraeg

originally posted by: turbonium1

originally posted by: AngryCymraeg

originally posted by: turbonium1
Evolution is not valid, that's why I'm explaining the reasons why it is not valid.


It lacks a shred of valid evidence, for one thing.

Please explain what your definition of 'valid' is. Because I'm betting that it's different from most people.

'Valid' has one definition. I'm betting you can look it up, like most people.


Evolution of ape-men to human is a myth, and has not one shred of 'valid' evidence.

After you look up 'valid', you'll understand what I mean.

Anything else?

Still merrily trolling away I see. No. I'm not going to play your game. Evidence of evolution has been posted up in answer to your questions again and again and again on other threads. There is a mountain of it, as opposed to... whatever the hell it is that you are pushing for. I am not going to trot it out yet again here, it's on those other threads. Just because you refuse to believe doesn't make any of it less real. And no, you can't play your little game of pretending that those threads don't exist - those threads where you were made to look like a complete fool. You have been defeated so many times now that I have lost count. This thread seems to be another attempt by you to pretend that those threads don't exist, that you are, laughably, still valid.
You are not.

No matter how often you claim evidence of evolution, it is not true.

Humans have always been humans, and always will be. Apes have always been apes, and always will be. We are NOT ancestors of any ape-caveman-species, and saying we are, over and over, isn't going to change that fact.

I've never seen any proof of humans being anything other than human, because it doesn't exist.

Show me ANY evidence for it...


**snip**

Millions of species exist on Earth, and have never once indicated any 'evolution' into another species. That's because every species has NEVER changed, and never will change, or 'transform', or 'evolve', into another species.

Just say 'evolution is true', over and over, in schools, in media, so everyone accepts it as a fact, without question, or doubt!!

Anyone who doubts it is true, or wants proof, is called a 'fool'. Because to doubt evolution is true, cannot be tolerated!!

Nice try...

a reply to: turbonium1

You can prove your statement OR disprove ourstatemetns right. Not wave words around like a toddler who has discovered a balloon?

originally posted by: Noinden
a reply to: turbonium1

No read what I said. Let me try slower for you.

(a) I am religious, just not Abrahamic. My Gods don't claim to create life, or the universe.

(b) The Abrahamic deity is supposed to be all seeing, all powerful, all everything. Yet life is imperfect, thus it seems that the all powerful uberbing, sucks at making things.
thus
(c) If we are created, it is by an imbecile.

Your argument is creation of all life on Earth has three, and only three, viable options....?

Those three above, yes?

What is a perfect life? Nobody dies, or is sick, or ages, etc?

Immortal, perfect?

Life is made for us, to live as we choose, and if it was made to be perfect, choice is not relevant, to us. As nothing matters if it's all perfect. It's all the same, now!

What about making it an 'almost perfect' life?


It's normal to think God would make life perfect, not harsh and cruel, of course....

But we'd never know love, and caring, if the opposite did not exist.

Making a perfect life is making a robot, which is not a life.

a reply to: turbonium1
New species have appeared in the last few centuries: www.bbc.co.uk...

originally posted by: turbonium1

originally posted by: AngryCymraeg

originally posted by: turbonium1

originally posted by: AngryCymraeg

originally posted by: turbonium1
Evolution is not valid, that's why I'm explaining the reasons why it is not valid.


It lacks a shred of valid evidence, for one thing.

Please explain what your definition of 'valid' is. Because I'm betting that it's different from most people.

'Valid' has one definition. I'm betting you can look it up, like most people.


Evolution of ape-men to human is a myth, and has not one shred of 'valid' evidence.

After you look up 'valid', you'll understand what I mean.

Anything else?

Still merrily trolling away I see. No. I'm not going to play your game. Evidence of evolution has been posted up in answer to your questions again and again and again on other threads. There is a mountain of it, as opposed to... whatever the hell it is that you are pushing for. I am not going to trot it out yet again here, it's on those other threads. Just because you refuse to believe doesn't make any of it less real. And no, you can't play your little game of pretending that those threads don't exist - those threads where you were made to look like a complete fool. You have been defeated so many times now that I have lost count. This thread seems to be another attempt by you to pretend that those threads don't exist, that you are, laughably, still valid.
You are not.

No matter how often you claim evidence of evolution, it is not true.

Humans have always been humans, and always will be. Apes have always been apes, and always will be. We are NOT ancestors of any ape-caveman-species, and saying we are, over and over, isn't going to change that fact.

I've never seen any proof of humans being anything other than human, because it doesn't exist.

Show me ANY evidence for it...


Attacking people for not following your ridiculous little argument, that has NO evidence, makes you desperate, and a troll..

Millions of species exist on Earth, and have never once indicated any 'evolution' into another species. That's because every species has NEVER changed, and never will change, or 'transform', or 'evolve', into another species.

Just say 'evolution is true', over and over, in schools, in media, so everyone accepts it as a fact, without question, or doubt!!

Anyone who doubts it is true, or wants proof, is called a 'fool'. Because to doubt evolution is true, cannot be tolerated!!

Nice try...

Dear me, your trolling gets worse and worse. 0/10 for basic reading skills. We are not the ancestors of apes, you have it backwards. It's the other way around. We are the descendants of creatures that were related to the other hominids. Get a dictionary. Learn to read.
Now, a little research. Go away and look up Homo Habilis. Try and read some research - genuine research and not something written by the liars from AIG.
Then look up the evolution of the whale. There's a lot of it in the fossil record, which is something that you must loathe, because it proves, in no doubt nauseating detail for you, just how utterly wrong you are.
We seem to be going over same ground I think. This was told to you in other threads. Where you made to look a fool. So, either you are indeed a fool or you are trolling us.
Anyone want to guess what my money's on?

a reply to: turbonium1

No that is not my argument. I was keeping it simple for you. You seem to need that.

I will say this again. If an omnipresent, omnipotent, uberdeity created Life the Universe and everything (tm) then it should be with out flaw. OR if its not. He's a po=or crafts deity or a complete tosser.

There are many ways life could have begun. Evolution has nothing to do with them

originally posted by: wildespace
a reply to: turbonium1
New species have appeared in the last few centuries: www.bbc.co.uk...

Name a scientific theory which has never been proven, which has yet to show any valid evidence it even exists, taken without a single dispute, or one doubt, as being true, as if it were - somehow - an established fact??

Evolution theory is a prime example -

Science works because it will examine the evidence of a theory, in knowing whether or not a theory might be true, or false. No scientific theory should be accepted as if a fact, if a theory is not proven to be a fact...yes?

What about this article?

Where is any specific example, of a species 'evolving' into another, unique, different species?

They claim cross-breeding can create an entirely new species, that can even reproduce, as that same new species....

Cross-breeding doesn't create another species, for starters. If it did, we'd have thousands of actual examples, in nature.

Nature doesn't seem to create new species by random 'evolution', so they say evolution is a process which happens over millions of years, nobody knows it's happening at all, since it's too slow to be observable!

10,000 years have passed, without the slightest indication of even one, single species, changing into another species.

This would indicate all species don't ever 'evolve' into any other species, right?


And it certainly doesn't indicate the very opposite will 'magically' start to happen, that's for sure!

originally posted by: Noinden
a reply to: turbonium1

No that is not my argument. I was keeping it simple for you. You seem to need that.

I will say this again. If an omnipresent, omnipotent, uberdeity created Life the Universe and everything (tm) then it should be with out flaw. OR if its not. He's a po=or crafts deity or a complete tosser.

There are many ways life could have begun. Evolution has nothing to do with them

God would make humans without illnesses, and live in our 20's forever, and so forth?

And if we are spiritual forms, that live forever, and life on Earth is not all there is, only a small part of the eternal voyage?


Would spiritual form perhaps be our true, perfect, existence? As only God could have created us?


What if life on Earth is one point of our spiritual path, to learn from it, to become more 'perfect'?

originally posted by: turbonium1

originally posted by: wildespace
a reply to: turbonium1
New species have appeared in the last few centuries: www.bbc.co.uk...

Name a scientific theory which has never been proven, which has yet to show any valid evidence it even exists, taken without a single dispute, or one doubt, as being true, as if it were - somehow - an established fact??

Evolution theory is a prime example...

There are certainly some aspects of the going Theory of Evolution that has some holes and needs fine tuning. However, the overall concept of "mutations and natural selection causing gradual but definite changes to biological populations leading to speciation" seems quite sound and well-vetted.

Mutations are observed and changes dues to natural selection is observed. It seems quite logical that over time these changes could result in a new species....and in fact we have observed (over time) some new plant species diverge from existing species, and have observed the possible early signs of divergence in some insects.

My question to you is what specific part or parts of that general concept called "Theory of Evolution" do you take issue with?

a reply to: turbonium1

Thats a lot of hand waving. If the Abrahamic deity is perfect as its followers say, there should not be the inherent mistakes in life. One of my degrees is in Bioinformatics and I'm quite familiar with the flaws in DNA, that lead to all sorts of "fun" for the creatures that use it (all of them, including us).

So it really comes down to the Abrahamic deity being shoddy, or a complete bastard. That second one coverses teh "one point on a spiritual path"

Speaking as a Polytheist, my deities don't play that game. They love games, usually involving dice of varying shapes and denominations

Evolution is a theory, not proven to exist...

It's taken as if it's true, and proven to exist, which is absurd.

Mutations have nothing to do with 'evolution' of a species. Same as genetic engineering is not evolution, either.


But the biggest issue I have with 'evolution', or any other 'grandiose theories', is the gall, and arrogance, to try mass brainwashing it to children, barely 7-8 years old, as if it was a fact, and is so important to know, that children are 'taught' about it from grade 1 or 2!!

In 4th grade science class, I saw a huge chart on the wall - showing the 'evolution' process of apes - to human!

Nothing is weird about teaching young, malleable, impressionable boys and girls in 1st or 2nd grade, or 4th grade 'science' classes, our ancestors were actually a bunch of extinct apes, who gradually 'evolved', into modern humans??

Theoretical concepts on the origin of a species - such as ape-into-human , are being taught to small children, just as I had once been taught, as a small child......because it will always be accepted, as true, forever after.

As a small child, without a clue on what sex means, let alone human reproduction, who cannot understand such concepts as yet....makes for the perfect 'student'.

It's never questioned, or doubted, as a child. Parents were taught the same thing. So evolution is accepted as true, or it's not so much a theory, as a 'fact'!!


I've spent most of my life believing what they said, what I was taught in school, why we fought wars, why we must give our earnings to the government, being it's a great benefit, to all the people!


I didn't bother with it, or care much, about it..not really.


Anyone who claims humans evolved from apes, or another species, must show evidence for it. I've yet to see any evidence.

a reply to: turbonium1

Please stop lying. Evidence has been provided for you, in thread after thread after thread. You either refuse to believe it or pretend that it does not exist. You are trolling us all.

originally posted by: AngryCymraeg
a reply to: turbonium1

Please stop lying. Evidence has been provided for you, in thread after thread after thread. You either refuse to believe it or pretend that it does not exist. You are trolling us all.

Accusing me of lying, without any support, and claiming evidence has been 'provided', without actually showing any evidence, is hardly trolling, right?

It's always the same old crap, ad nauseum.

a reply to: turbonium1

No, it's just pointing out the fact that you continue to troll us. You have been given access to an ocean of evidence in previous threads. Are you now denying that none of it exists? If so then nope, sorry, I'm not letting you get away with that. There's no point debating you on science because you lie and try to claim that no evidence has ever been presented to you - when it has. You know it has.
Therefore you are a troll.

originally posted by: AngryCymraeg
a reply to: turbonium1

No, it's just pointing out the fact that you continue to troll us. You have been given access to an ocean of evidence in previous threads. Are you now denying that none of it exists? If so then nope, sorry, I'm not letting you get away with that. There's no point debating you on science because you lie and try to claim that no evidence has ever been presented to you - when it has. You know it has.
Therefore you are a troll.

Again, you accuse me of lying, with NO PROOF. You claim there is evidence, and SHOW NOTHING.

Anyone can see who the troll is here.

Show me actual evidence, and stop trolling about it.

Here's a hint:

Do NOT say 'You've been shown all the evidence, are you denying it?' Without showing any evidence, as usual.

Instead, you can simply say 'Here is the evidence you've been shown before, I'd like you to address it '.

And present the evidence, which I will be happy to address.


See how easy that would be, and how much more productive it would be for further ACTUAL debate?

Give it a try.

originally posted by: Box of Rain

Mutations are observed and changes dues to natural selection is observed. It seems quite logical that over time these changes could result in a new species....and in fact we have observed (over time) some new plant species diverge from existing species, and have observed the possible early signs of divergence in some insects.

Convenient denial of or leaving out inconvenient facts is so popular these days. I refer back to my earlier comment in another thread about what the facts concerning mutations acted upon by natural selection really show. For now, since others keep repeating the same ideas/philosophies and supposed "logical" views/beliefs, I'll just keep repeating the conclusion from Lönnig, who has spent some 30 years studying mutation genetics in plants. For details regarding what his conclusion is based on see the entire comment. Ignoring the facts won't make them go away or your views sound any more logical to those who are aware of them (or regularly reminded of them; it's on the previous page as well).

...the data now gathered from some 100 years of mutation research in general and 70 years of mutation breeding in particular enable scientists to draw conclusions regarding the ability of mutations to produce new species. After examining the evidence, Lönnig concluded: “Mutations cannot transform an original species [of plant or animal] into an entirely new one. This conclusion agrees with all the experiences and results of mutation research of the 20th century taken together as well as with the laws of probability.”

So, can mutations cause one species to evolve into a completely new kind of creature? The evidence answers no! Lönnig’s research has led him to the conclusion that “properly defined species have real boundaries that cannot be abolished or transgressed by accidental mutations.”22

22. Mutation Breeding, Evolution, and the Law of Recurrent Variation, pp. 49, 50, 52, 54, 59, 64, and interview with Wolf-Ekkehard Lönnig.

Of course, some people prefer to improperly define supposed "new species". Even with them still interbreeding with what is claimed to be another species (just as Darwin's various species of finches, which are all still finches). Regardless:

The teaching of macroevolution is built on the claim that mutations—random changes in the genetic code of plants and animals—can produce not only new species but also entirely new families of plants and animals.19

19. Nobel Lectures, Physiology or Medicine 1942-1962, 1999, “The Production of Mutations,” by H. J. Muller, 1946, p. 162.

And that's the real issue here, not capitalizing on the ambiguity of language regarding the word "species" or term "new species" and playing some kind of debate routine or game about those words (what is "new"? What is not "new"?) to distract from the facts mentioned by Lönnig that expose the major flaw in the evolutionary storyline that is also referred to as macroevolution:

Consider the implications of the above facts. If highly trained scientists are unable to produce new species by artificially inducing and selecting favorable mutations, is it likely that an unintelligent process would do a better job? If research shows that mutations cannot transform an original species into an entirely new one, then how, exactly, was macroevolution supposed to have taken place?

Source: see linked comment, end of that thread, last comment.

a reply to: turbonium1

Neighbour. You don't seem to understand how the wordtheoryis applied in science.

Viz

A scientific theory is a well-substantiated explanation of some aspect of the natural world, based on a body of facts that have been repeatedly confirmed through observation and experiment. Such fact-supported theories are not "guesses" but reliable accounts of the real world.

Please at least try to be scientifically literate when you are flinging feces at something. Otherwise you look like an uneducated primate

originally posted by: Noinden
a reply to: turbonium1

Neighbour. You don't seem to understand how the wordtheoryis applied in science.

Viz

A scientific theory is a well-substantiated explanation of some aspect of the natural world, based on a body of facts that have been repeatedly confirmed through observation and experiment. Such fact-supported theories are not "guesses" but reliable accounts of the real world.

Please at least try to be scientifically literate when you are flinging feces at something. Otherwise you look like an uneducated primate

There are virtually countless scientific theories, and all of them are valid, you think?

You seriously believe that?


Theories don't prove anything, that's why they're called 'theories'.

Some theories are never proven, while others will be found proven, same way.


Evolution theory is not proven to exist, and suggesting it's proven is utterly absurd.